Abstract
The Orchidaceae is a mega-diverse plant family with ca. 29,000 species with a large variety of life forms that can colonize transitory habitats. Despite this diversity, little is known about their flowering integrators in response to specific environmental factors. During the reproductive transition in flowering plants a vegetative apical meristem (SAM) transforms into an inflorescence meristem (IM) that forms bracts and flowers. In model grasses, like rice, a flowering genetic regulatory network (FGRN) controlling reproductive transitions has been identified, but little is known in the Orchidaceae. In order to analyze the players of the FRGN in orchids, we performed comprehensive phylogenetic analyses of CONSTANS-like/CONSTANS-like 4 (COL/COL4), FLOWERING LOCUS D (FD), FLOWERING LOCUS C/FRUITFULL (FLC/FUL) and SUPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1 (SOC1) gene lineages. In addition to PEBP and AGL24/SVP genes previously analyzed, here we identify an increase of orchid homologs belonging to COL4, and FUL gene lineages in comparison with other monocots, including grasses, due to orchid-specific gene lineage duplications. Contrariwise, local duplications in Orchidaceae are less frequent in the COL, FD and SOC1 gene lineages, which points to a retention of key functions under strong purifying selection in essential signaling factors. We also identified changes in the protein sequences after such duplications, variation in the evolutionary rates of resulting paralogous clades and targeted expression of isolated homologs in different orchids. Interestingly, vernalization-response genes like VERNALIZATION1 (VRN1) and FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC) are completely lacking in orchids, or alternatively are reduced in number, as is the case of VERNALIZATION2/GHD7 (VRN2). Our findings point to non-canonical factors sensing temperature changes in orchids during reproductive transition. Expression data of key factors gathered from Elleanthus auratiacus, a terrestrial orchid in high Andean mountains allow us to characterize which copies are actually active during flowering. Altogether, our data lays down a comprehensive framework to assess gene function of a restricted number of homologs identified more likely playing key roles during the flowering transition, and the changes of the FGRN in neotropical orchids in comparison with temperate grasses.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The floral transition resulting in the change from vegetative to reproductive phase is a critical developmental step in the angiosperms life cycle. In monocot model species like rice (Oryza sativa), the reproductive transition includes the meristem identity change from the vegetative shoot apical meristem (SAM) that forms leaves, to a reproductive inflorescence meristem (IM) that develops branch (BM) and spikelet (SM) meristems resulting in a compound inflorescence with floral meristems (Itoh et al. 2005; Tanaka et al. 2013). This process is regulated by endogenous and environmental factors, which merge into four main pathways: photoperiod (light response), vernalization (cold response), autonomous, and hormonal signaling (Lee & An 2015; Levy & Dean 1998; Parcy 2005). In O. sativa, the flowering genetic regulatory network (FGRN) includes promoters and repressors that control meristem transition, fate, and identity. In short days (SD), Heading date 1 (Hd1, a CONSTANS- CO, homolog) is activated early on and forms a complex with the florigen Heading date 3a (Hd3a, a FLOWERING LOCUS T-FT homolog) that plays a critical role in mediating the photoperiod flowering signal (Kojima et al. 2002; Komiya et al. 2008; Tamaki et al. 2007; Tsuji et al. 2008). Conversely, in long days (LD), Hd1 is converted into a transcriptional repressor (Kojima et al. 2002; Komiya et al. 2008). However, in LD rice cultivars, RICE FLOWERING LOCUS T1 (RFT1), and OsFTL4, both Hd3a paralogs, are recruited for floral induction (Gu et al. 2022; Komiya et al. 2008). All the flowering signals including Early heading date 1 (Ehd1, a B-type response regulator), Hd3a and RFT1 are negatively regulated by the Oryza sativa Grain number, Plant Height and Heading date 7 (Ghd7, a CO-homolog) and CONSTANS-LIKE4 (OsCOL4, CO- homolog) (Choi et al. 2014; Endo-Higashi and Izawa 2011). However, if FT signaling is in place, and has bypassed all suppressors, the rice homolog of FLOWERING LOCUS D (FD, a bZIP homolog) OsFD1, interacts with Hd3a via the 14-3-3 proteins to form a florigen activation complex (FAC) (Taoka et al. 2011). This FAC induces the transcription of OsMADS14 and OsMADS15 (the APETALA1/FRUITFULL homologs) in the shoot apex during floral transition (Taoka et al. 2013; Taoka et al. 2011; Tsuji et al. 2013). In parallel, OsMADS50 and OsMADS51 (the SUPRESSOR OF CONSTANS 1 homologs), together with OsMADS22 and OsMADS47 (the AGAMOUS Like 24/SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE homologs) promote floral meristem identity, and only OsMADS55 (another AGL24/SVP gene) represses flowering (Fornara et al. 2008; Lee et al. 2012, 2004).
Although the flowering genetic regulatory network (FGRN) is relatively similar across grasses (Higgins et al. 2010; Leiboff and Hake 2019; Qin et al. 2017), in crown pooids like wheat (Triticum aestivum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare), there are additional vernalization responses. Flowering is determined by allelic variation at the VERNALIZATION1 (VRN1, an AP1/FUL homolog) and/or VRN2 (a CO-like homolog) loci (Preston and Kellogg 2008; Trevaskis et al. 2003, 2007). VRN2 alleles can directly or indirectly repress VRN1 alleles in LD, resulting in flowering repression (Trevaskis et al. 2007). In addition, during vernalization and/or exposure to SD, VRN2 transcription is reduced, resulting in an up-regulation of VRN1 and triggering flowering (Preston and Kellogg 2008; Trevaskis et al. 2003). Other genes, including FLC (FLOWERING LOCUS C) homologs, also repress the flowering inducers prior to cold exposure (Alexandre and Hennig 2008; Michaels and Amasino 1999; Searle et al. 2006). In barley, mutants of flowering repressors such as hvvrn2 and hvos, result in plants with no cold exposure requirements and early flowering (Chen and Dubcovsky 2012; Distelfeld and Dubcovsky 2010; Greenup et al. 2010; Woods et al. 2016).
While the FGRN has been relatively well studied in grasses, less is known about the genetic mechanisms of flowering in non-model monocots, including orchids. With ca. 29,000 species, the Orchidaceae is one of the most diverse groups of ornamental angiosperms with very attractive flowers, many of which also have extensive vegetative phases in their life cycles, hindering cultivation and large-scale maintenance of flowering individuals (Hew and Yong 2004; Huang et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2017). The isolation and characterization of flowering genes, including CO, FT, FUL, SOC1 and SVP/AGL24, have only been made in few commercial, mostly temperate orchids, like Cymbidium, Dendrobium, Oncidium and Phalaenopsis (Huang et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2017, 2019).
Assessing the homology of all genes conforming the FGRN in orchids is important for several reasons, namely: (1) the occurrence of independent whole genome duplications (WGD) across angiosperm diversification has changed the gene complements in orchids in comparison to model monocots, like grasses. (2) FGRN genes belong to different gene lineages that have different evolutionary histories in angiosperms. And finally, (3) Gene copy number and homology for all copies needs to be established prior to expression and functional characterization of the FGRN. We have previously implemented large-scale phylogenetic reconstructions for the FT and the AGL24/SVP genes across angiosperms, with a special focus in orchids. Such approach has proven valuable in narrowing down the putative genes more likely to control reproductive transitions and to assign them a hypothetical role as promoters or repressors (Madrigal et al. 2021; Ospina-Zapata et al. 2020; Ramirez-Ramirez et al. 2021). In order to understand the evolution of the FGRN in Orchidaceae, here we performed comprehensive ML analyses of the CO/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1 gene lineages in angiosperms, with a special focus on Orchidaceae. We evaluate the expression of all target genes in Elleanthus aurantiacus, a tropical and terrestrial member of the Orchidaceae, with biannual flowering seasons using both RT-PCR and RNA-seq. Our results allow us to propose a hypothetical FGRN for orchids with significant variations in copy number and expression patterns when compared to the canonical rice FGRN.
Materials and Methods
Homolog isolation of flowering candidate genes
In order to isolate CONSTANS-like/CONSTANS-like 4 (COL/COL4), FLOWERING LOCUS D (FD), FLOWERING LOCUS C/FRUITFULL (FLC/FUL) and SUPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1 (SOC1) homologs, searches across major angiosperm lineages were made using BLASTN (Basic local alignment search tool) (Altschul et al. 1990) on public repositories and on our own databases. We included as queries canonical genes in the FGRN of Arabidopsis thaliana, Oryza sativa, and orchid homologs available from the literature or specialized databases (Supplementary Table S1). The databases searched included: NCBI (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/), OneKP (https://db.cngb.org/onekp/), Phytozome (https://phytozome.jgi.doe.gov/pz/portal.html), the vanilla Genome hub (https://vanilla-genome-hub.cirad.fr/) Orchidbase 4.0 (http://orchidbase.itps.ncku.edu.tw/est/home2012.aspx), and Orchidstra 2.0 (http://orchidstra2.abrc.sinica.edu.tw/orchidstra2/index.php) (Carpenter et al. 2019; Chao et al. 2017; Tsai et al. 2013). Searches were also done in our own transcriptomes generated for non-model neotropical plant species which include the Magnoliid Aristolochia fimbriata and Saruma henryi (Pabón-Mora et al. 2015; Peréz-Mesa et al. 2019); Cloranthaceae members like, Chloranthus spicatus, Hedyosmum goudotianum, and Sarcandra chloranthoides; the eudicots: Bocconia frutescens, Borojoa patinoi, Brunfelsia australis and Streptosolen jamesonii (Arango-Ocampo et al. 2016; Ortiz-Ramírez et al. 2018; Salazar-Duque et al. 2021); and the Monocots: Cattleya trianae, Elleanthus aurantiacus, Epidendrum frimbriatum, Gomphichis scaposa, Hypoxis decumbens, Masdevallia coccinea, Masdevallia wendlandiana, Maxillaria aurea, Miltoniopsis roezlii, Oncidium “Gower Ramsey”, Oncidium “Twinkle”, Stelis pusilla, Tolumnia “Cherry red x Ralph yagi” and Vanilla aphyla (Madrigal et al. 2017; Ospina-Zapata et al. 2020; Ramirez-Ramirez et al. 2021).
Phylogenetic analyses of flowering candidate genes
To analyze the evolution of the COL/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1 gene lineages separate matrices were generated with all isolated homologs. Sequences were cleaned manually to keep only the CDS using Aliview (Larsson 2014). Then, the sequences were aligned using the online version of the software MAFFT (mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/software/ (Katoh et al. 2018)) with a gap opening penalty of 3.0 and offset value of 1.0. The phylogenetic hypothesis were done by maximum likelihood (ML) using the desktop version of IQ-TREE software (http://www.iqtree.org; Minh et al. 2020; Nguyen et al. 2015). The molecular evolution model that best fits to the data was found with ModelFinder on IQ-TREE (Kalyaanamoorthy et al. 2017). The branch support was calculated with Ultrafast Bootstrap (UFBS) of 1000 pseudo-replicas, also available in IQ-TREE (Hoang et al. 2018). The trees obtained were observed using FigTree v1.4.4 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/). To identify and confirm duplications in each gene lineage we gave special attention to genes from species with a sequenced genome (Supplementary Table S1). Specifically for orchids, we included the genomes of Apostasia shenzhenica, Dendrobium catenatum, Phalaenopsis aphrodite, Phalaenopsis equestris, Platanthera guangdongensis, Platanthera zijinensis and Vanilla planifolia. In all gene trees genomic information was essential to pointing out large-scale duplication events and/or intra-specific duplication events. The latter category remains to be confirmed as the data derived from transcriptomic analyses fails to distinguish intraspecific duplicates from splicing variants, but in most cases variation among sequences is larger than 5%, and not due to indels, suggesting these sequences are most likely copies. Nevertheless, genome sequencing for mon-model orchids will eventually confirm our inferences.
Relative rates of evolution
To test for changes in the selection constraints in the duplicate gene lineages found, we performed a series of Likelihood Ratio Tests (LRTs) using the branch-specific model implemented by the CodeML in the PAML package v.4.8 (Yang 2007). We compared the one ratio model (1-ω) that assumes a constant dN/dS ratio (= ω, per site ratio of nonsynonymous -dN- to synonymous -dS- substitution) along tree branches (ωo), against a two-ratio model (2-ω) that assumes a different ratio for a given subclade (foreground = ωf) relative to the remaining sequences (background = ωb). In the genes COL/COL4, the test was implemented in the clades COL, MonGHD7L and MonCOL4, using the B-box I, B-box II, and the CCT domain together. In the FD gene lineage, comparisons were made for MonFDL1, OrchFDL2A, OrchFDL2B, including all the bZIP and SAP domains. In the FLC/FUL gene lineage tests were performed for EudiFLC, MonFLC, EudiAP1/FUL, VRN1, MonFUL1 and MonFUL2, using only the conserved MIK domains of these MADS-box genes. Finally, in the SOC1 gene lineage tests were implemented in the EudiAGL42/71/72, EudiAGL14/19, EudiSOC1/AGL20, OrchSOC1L 1A, OrchSOC1L 1B and OrchSOC1L 2 clades, including all four MIKC domains.
Identification of conserved motifs across angiosperms
In order to identify protein domains previously reported and new conserved motifs for each COL/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1 proteins, permanently translated CDS were used as input on the MEME server (meme-suite.org/tools/meme; (Bailey et al. 2009, 2015)). The sampling included 159 sequences of COL/COL4 proteins, 87 from FD proteins, 113 from FLC/FUL proteins and 108 from SOC1 proteins. Motif search was done using default settings and different numbers of conserved motifs were selected and numbered according to the protein family.
Morpho-anatomical characterization of the flowering transition in Elleanthus aurantiacus
In order to establish changes in size, and the initiation of lateral organs as well as new morphological features occurring during flowering transition in the selected orchid species E. aurantiacus light microscopy (LM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were used. For SEM analysis, SAM, IM and FBs from E. aurantiacus were collected in 70% ethanol and stored for one month or longer. Apices and buds were dissected in ethanol 90% following (Madrigal et al. 2021; Ospina-Zapata et al. 2020). The dissected samples were dehydrated in a progressive ethanol series. Samples and were critical point-dried using a Baltec CPD 030, coated with pure gold using an Emitech K550 sputter coater. Finally, samples were examined and photographed at 10 kV on a Zeiss SUPRA 40VP scanning electron microscope. For anatomical analyses, SAM and IM buds in different developmental stages were prepared by conventional dehydration with ethanol and histochoice (VWR, Radnor, USA) using standard series. Samples were embedded in Paraplast Plus (Leica Biosystems, Buffalo Grove, USA) and were sectioned at 10 µm with a Leica RM2125 RTS microtome. Sections were stained in safranin and astra-blue and examined using a Zeiss Primo Star Compound Microscope equipped with an Axiocam ERc 5 s Zeiss digital camera with Zen 2.3 Lite software.
RT-PCR expression analysis of GRN candidate genes
In order to assess the expression patterns of the COL/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1 homologs in orchids, Elleanthus aurantiacus was selected. The reasons for such selection are the following: (1) it is a neotropical terrestrial orchid, easily accessible in the field, (2) it flowers two times per year in tune with the rainy seasons, (3) it had a low copy number of all tested gene lineages, and (4) the availability of plant material in vegetative and reproductive stages was sufficient to record morphological changes during reproductive transition (see below). Dissections of vegetative (SAM) and inflorescence (IM) meristems, flower buds (FB) and leaves (L) were made following the landmarks observed in the morpho-anatomical analysis, and were collected in liquid nitrogen separately. Total RNA extraction from each dissected tissue was done using TRIsure (Bioline, London, UK) according to manufacturer instructions and it was resuspended in 20 μl of miliQ water. The RNA was treated with DNAseI (Invitrogen, Waltham, USA) and was quantified using NanoDrop 2000 (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, USA). A total of 3.0 μg of RNA was used for cDNA synthesis using SuperScript III Reverse Transcriptase (Invitrogen, Waltham, USA). Specific primers were designed for the amplification of each isolated gene of interest (GOI) avoiding conserved domains (Supplementary Table S2). The amplification reactions of each GOI were done using 6.0 μl of EconoTaq (Lucigen, Middleton, USA), 4 μl of nuclease-free water, 1 μl of bovine serum albumin (5 μg/ml), 1 μl of Betaine (5 μg/ml), 1 μl of forward primer, 1 μl of reverse primer, and 1 μl of cDNA, for a total of 15 μl. The genes were amplified by PCR during 30 cycles following the next thermal profiles: an initial denaturation step (94 °C for 30 s), an annealing step (two degrees under the annealing temperature -Tm of primer with less Tm, for 30 s) and one extension step (72 °C for 40 s). All reactions finished with a final elongation step (72 °C, during 10 min) and a cold incubation (4° forever). ACTIN was used as a positive control. The amplicons were visualized on 1% agarose gel with ethidium bromide and digitally photographed using a Whatman Biometra ® BioDoc Analyzer. For comparative purposes, a review of the reported expression patterns was carried out in Arabidopsis thaliana, Oryza sativa and Zea Mays available in the BAR database (http://bar.utoronto.ca/), Apostasia schenzhenica, Dendrobium catenatum and Phalaenopsis equestris available in the OrchidBase 4.0 database (http://orchidbase.itps.ncku.edu.tw/est/home2012.aspx) and Phalaenopsis aphrodite available in the Orchidstra 2.0 database (http://orchidstra2.abrc.sinica.edu.tw/orchidstra2/index.php).
RNA-seq experiments in dissected SAM and IM of Elleanthus arantiacus
To compare the transcriptional differences between meristems during flowering transition de novo transcriptomes from E. aurantiacus were obtained from the dissected vegetative meristem (SAM) and reproductive meristem (IM). Freshly dissected tissue was pooled from different plants at the same developmental age and stage in order to avoid biases caused by a plant. The experiment was conducted with three biological replicates per stage. All tissue was ground using liquid nitrogen. Total RNA was extracted using TRIsure (Bioline, London, UK) according to manufacturer instructions. The RNA-seq experiments were conducted using Truseq mRNA library construction kit (Illumina, USA) and sequenced on a NovaSeq 6000 equipment (Illumina, USA) with paired end readings of 100 bp. Different libraries were done independently for each RNA extraction. Read cleaning was performed with PRINTSEQ-LITE with a quality threshold of Q30 and contig assembly was computed using Trinity package following default settings (Pabón-Mora et al. 2023). The transcriptome assembly was performed for each SAM and IM dissections, and a combined transcriptome was also included (Supplementary Table S3). Orthologous gene search was performed using BLASTN with the orchid homologs COL/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1 as query. To estimate the relative abundance of the assembled contigs, cleaned reads were mapped against the de novo assembled dataset using the algorithm Kallisto with default settings (https://pachterlab.github.io/kallisto/). Kallisto quantifies transcript expression normalizing the relative abundance of each contig/transcript using the transcript per million (TPM) metrics (Owens et al. 2019; Pabón-Mora et al. 2023). The heatmap was constructed using the R package pheatmap (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pheatmap/index.html).
Results
CONSTANS-Like/CONSTANS-Like 4 (COL/COL4) gene evolution
An exhaustive search in angiosperms for members of the B-box zinc finger protein family (BBX) group I including CONSTANS Like/CONSTANS Like 4 (COL/COL4) genes was made. The search resulted in the isolation of 359 homologs belonging to 120 species from flowering plants (Supplementary Table S1), of which, 30 homologs belong to 9 species of early diverging angiosperms, 15 are from 7 species of basal eudicots, 65 are from 22 species of core eudicots, 90 are from 38 species of non-orchid monocots and finally, 159 correspond to 44 species of Orchidaceae. Nucleotide sequences of all isolated homologs were used in the maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic analysis and the homolog of COL9 from Amborella trichopoda (AmtrgCOL9) was used as outgroup.
Our analysis showed two large-scale duplication events prior to angiosperm diversification that separate COL9 (outgroup) (UFBS = 97), from paraphyletic COL genes (UFBS = 43, UFBS = 48, UFBS = 44) and monophyletic COL4 genes (UFBS = 90, Figs. 1, 2, 3). COL genes are primarily retained as single copy, except in the Brassicaceae, as a result of a local duplication in the family (UFBS = 100, Fig. 1). Intra-specific duplications can be detected in Akebia quinata, Brachypodium distachyon, Chloranthus spicatus, Coffea arabica, Oryza sativa, Paeonia suffruticosa, and Streptosolen jamesonii.
Conversely, the phylogenetic history of the COL4 genes is marked by reiterative duplications. At least 4 duplication events have occurred in the eudicots, labelled here as EudiCOL4 (Fig. 2), one prior to the diversification of core eudicots (UFBS = 91), two duplications specific to Brassicaceae (UFBS = 100 and UFBS = 99), and one in Solanaceae (UFBS = 100). Intraspecific duplications have occurred in Akebia quinata, Chloranthus spicatus, Coffea arabica, Dalea cuatrecasasii, Hedyosmum goudotianum and Sarcandra chloranthoides. Different to EudiCOL4, their homologs in monocots have undergone several duplication events (Fig. 3). An early duplication in monocot diversification resulted in the MonGHD7Like (UFBS = 88) and MonCOLike4 (UFBS = 76) clades. Additional local duplications in Poales result in the previously reported VRN2/GHD7 (UFBS = 51) and COLike9 (UFBS = 99) paralog clades (Woods et al. 2016). Finally, three additional duplications have occurred in the Orchidaceae for MonCOLike4 homologs, one specific to the Apostasioideae subfamily (UFBS = 92), one specific to the Vanilloideae subfamily (UFBS = 100), and another prior to Vanilloideae diversification, resulting in the OrchCOLike4A (UFBS = 100) and OrchCOLike4B (UFBS = 88) clades. Species-specific duplications in the MonCOL4/GHD7L clades are recorded in Apostasia wallichii, Cymbidium sinense, Dendrobium nobile, Elaeis guineensis, Elleanthus aurantiacus, Epidendum fimbriatum, Erycina pusilla, Hypoxis decumbens, Masdevallia coccinea "alba", Masdevallia wendlandiana, Maxilaria aurea, Musa acuminata, Oncidium "Gower Ramsey", Oryza brachyantha, Stelis pusilla, Tolumnia “Cherry red x Ralph yagh”, Vanilla aphylla, Vanilla planifolia, Zea mays and Zoostera marina.
We analyzed the protein sequences of COL/COL4 across flowering plants. These belong to the B-box zinc finger protein family (BBX) group I and contain two B-box domains (B-box I and B-box II) and a CCT domain (Gangappa and Botto 2014; Khanna et al. 2009). We found that the average length of COL proteins varies around of 226–396 aa whereas COL4 proteins range between 240–300 aa. Our analysis identified near the N-terminal region, the B-box I domain, corresponding to the conserved motif 3 and the more variable motifs 7 or 18 (Supplementary Figure S1). The B-box II domain corresponds in the analysis to the highly conserved motif 2, and the CCT motif at the C-terminal region, includes a putative nuclear localization sequence (NLS), and corresponds to motif 1. Motifs 5, 6, 8, and 25 are shared in all COL/COL4 proteins, except MonGHD7L. All COL/COL4 proteins, except those in the VRN2/GHD7 group, also share motif 9. However, it is possible that these motifs have remained undetected because of the inclusion of incomplete sequences in the analyses. Our analysis identified MonGHD7L exclusive motifs, namely motifs 14, 20, 22, as well as COL9 exclusive motifs, namely 12, 21, and 23. MonCOL4 proteins can be characterized by motifs 4, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 28 and 30. Similarly, motifs 24 and 29 are exclusive to OrchCOL4A and motif 27 is specific to Poaceae proteins inside MonCOL4. Finally, we identified COL specific motifs, namely 13, 16, 17 and 19, and the grass specific motif 26.
To determine if there are differences in selection constraints acting on the MonCOL4/MonGHD7L and COL proteins, a series of targeted likelihood ratio tests (LRT) were performed. First, a one ratio model was tested for all MonCOL4/MonGHD7L and COL sequences resulting in a ωo = 0.0519 (Supplementary Table S4). Next a two-ratio model was implemented to test shifts in selection rates in selected gene clades when compared to the remaining sequences. For this we used the B-box I, the B-box II, and the CCT domains. The test showed that all clades are under purifying selection, however, it was shown to be increased in COL (ωf = 0.0580 vs. ωb = 0.1792) and relaxed in the MonCOL4 (ωf = 0.4761 vs. ωb = 0.1692), and the MonGHD7L (ωf = 0.2832 vs. ωb = 0.1680) clades (Supplementary Table S4). Such relaxed purifying selection in MonCOL4 coincides with large variation in sequence and the occurrence of unique protein motifs (i.e., motifs 4, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 28 and 30). Similarly, relaxed purifying selection in MonGHD7L coincides with shorter proteins and the loss of a number of conserved motifs (i.e., motifs 2, 3, 18) (Supplementary Figure S1).
FLOWERING LOCUS D (FD) gene evolution
Our sampling of the bZip FD genes includes 170 homologs from 78 angiosperm species, from which, 6 sequences are from 6 species of early divergent angiosperms, 4 from 4 species of basal eudicots, 41 from 22 species of core eudicots, 25 from 11 species of non-orchid monocots and finally, 94 correspond to 35 species belonging to Orchidaceae (Supplementary Table S1). We used the Amborella Trichopoda, AmtrFDL, as outgroup. The topology of the ML analysis (Fig. 4) shows a duplication prior to the diversification of Brassicaceae (UFBS = 100) and another one specific to Solanaceae (UFBS = 99) within EudiFD. Species-specific duplications are found in Brassica rapa, Brunfelsia australis, Nelumbo nucifera, Solanum tuberosum and Theobroma cacao. On the other hand, our topology recovered a duplication event prior to monocots forming the MonFDL1 (UFBS = 95) and MonFDL2 (UFBS = 93) genes. The former is recovered as a clade, whereas the latter is only rescued as a grade. Another duplication event within MonFDL2 in the Orchidaceae, results in the OrchFDL2A (UFBS = 89) and OrchFDL2B (UFBS = 89, Fig. 4) paralogs. Two additional duplications have occurred in the Poaceae MonFDL1 genes (UFBS = 100 and UFBS = 100). In other words, the duplication event prior to monocot diversification was followed by the retention of only one copy of MonFDL1 in Poaceae, where all genome sequences of Poales species are nested, and MonFDL2 in other non-orchid monocots, where we can find genome sequences from Musa acuminata, Ananas comosus and Asparagus officinalis (Fig. 4). Finally, intraspecific duplications have occurred in Ananas comosus, Apostasia shenzhenica, Asparagus officinalis, Cymbidium sinense, Dendrobium catenatum, Epidendrum fimbriatum, M. acuminata, Masdevallia coccinea, Neuwiedia zollingeri, Oncidium "Gower Ramsey", Oncidium "Twinkle", Phalaenopsis equestris, Platanthera guangdongensis, Stelis pusilla, Tolumnia “Cherry red x Ralph yagh”, Vanilla aphylla, and Vanilla planifolia.
FD belongs to the bZIP family characterized by the bZIP at the C-terminal and a SAP motif targeted by calcium-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs) important for FD functions (Abe et al. 2005). The FD protein sequence analysis across flowering plants showed that all protein sequences have an average length of 130-300aa. In our analysis the bZIP domain and the SAP motif correspond to motifs 1 and 6, respectively. Additional conserved motifs across angiosperms include motifs 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 17 (Supplementary Figure S2). EudiFD proteins share motif 18. Conversely, monocot proteins have a larger variation in motif number. Some MonFDL1 and OrchFDL2A proteins replace conserved motif 2 by a more variable motif 13. Poaceae proteins often lack motifs like 3, 4, 7 and 17, and instead have the specific motifs 15 and 20. Similarly, MonFDL1 proteins lack the motifs 5, 7 and 17 and have specific motif 11. Finally, MonFDL2 proteins share motifs 8, 10, and 12, and within diagnostic motifs 9 and 14 can be used to recognize OrchFDL2A, while motifs 16 and 19 can be used to recognize OrchFDL2B proteins (Supplementary Figure S2).
Likelihood ratio tests (LRT) determined important variation in selection constraints acting on FD genes (Supplementary Table S4). A one ratio model was tested for all FD sequences resulting in a ωo = 0.0332. Next a two-ratio model was implemented to test shifts in selection rates in MonFDL1, OrchFDL2A and OrchFDL2B when compared to the remaining sequences. For this we used the bZIP and SAP domains. The test showed that all clades are under strong purifying selection (ω0 = 0.0332) (Supplementary Table S4). However, the analyses showed that the purifying selection is relaxed in OrchFDL2A (ωf = 0.1553 vs. ωb = 0.0527) and OrchFDL2B (ωf = 0.0799 vs. ωb = 0.0421) which coincides with extensive sequence variation (i.e., in motifs 8, 10, 12). On the other hand, an increased purifying selection was found in MonFDL1 (ωf = 0.0053 vs. ωb = 0.0502) (Supplementary Figure S2).
FLOWERING LOCUS C/FRUITFULL (FLC/FUL) gene evolution
With an exhaustive sampling we are able to isolate 230 MADS-box type II FLC/FUL homologs from 108 Angiosperm species, including 9 sequences of 5 species of early divergent angiosperms, 10 from 5 basal eudicots, 92 from 45 core eudicots, 53 from 26 from non-orchid monocots and finally, 66 correspond to 27 species from Orchidaceae (Supplementary Table S1). We used AGL6 genes from Amborella trichopoda (AmtrAGL6), Aristolochia fimbriata (AfimAGL6) and Arabidopsis thaliana (AthAGL6) as outgroup. The analyses recovers the sister group relation already known between FLC and AP1/FUL genes. The resulting phylogenetic tree confirms that FLC genes are lacking in orchids, while they are still present in Poaceae, and are extensively diversified in eudicots (Fig. 5). We confirm this with an exhaustive search in all the orchid genomes available without a successful isolation of homologs. Two specific duplication events have occurred within FLC genes in grasses (UFBS = 100 and UFBS = 99), and intraspecific duplications are found in Arabidopsis arenosa, Arabidopsis thaliana, Boechera stricta, Brassica rapa, Brunfelsia australis, Coffea arabica, Glycine max, Streptosolen jamesonii and Triticum aestivum.
On the other hand, FUL genes have undergone at least two duplication events in core eudicots resulted in the AGL79 (also called euFULII, UFBS = 93), FUL (also called euFULI, UFBS = 71) and AP1/CAL (UFBS = 99) homologs (Fig. 5, (Maheepala et al. 2019)). Our analysis recovered the reported additional duplications in Solanaceae, one inside euFULI (UFBS = 100) and the other one within euFULII genes (UFBS = 100). One additional duplication event has occurred within monocots, resulting in the MonFUL1 (UFBS = 87) and MonFUL2 (UFBS = 99) clades. MonFUL1 includes the previously reported VRN1 and FUL2 genes in grasses (McKeown et al. 2016; Preston and Kellogg 2006, 2007). Interestingly, our topology supports that VRN1 is the result of a specific duplication inside Pooideae (UFBS = 100) and orchids only have the pre-duplication copies. On the other hand, MonFUL2 includes the reported FUL3 genes in grasses and FUL-like in non-grass monocots (Preston and Kellogg 2006). Two additional duplication events have been found in MonFUL1 and MonFUL2, inside Orchidaceae as previously reported (Valoroso et al. 2019), namely here as OrchFUL1A—OrchFUL1B and OrchFUL2A—OrchFUL2B (Fig. 5). We confirm the reliability of those duplications using the genomic information available for orchids. Additionally, species-specific duplications were found in Aquilegia coerulea, Arabidopsis thaliana, Asarum europaeum, Bocconia frutescens, Brachypodium distachyon, Cattleya trianae, Epidendrum fimbriatum, Eschscholzia californica, Gomphichis scaposa, Hypoxis decumbens, Masdevallia wendlandiana, Maxilaria aurea, Miltoniopsis roezlii, Oncidium ´Twinkle´, Tolumnia ´Cherry red x Ralph yagi´, Triticum monococcum and Zea mays.
FLC/FUL proteins belong to the MADS-box type II gene family and all the sequences show the presence of the typical MIKC domains present in MADS-box proteins (Supplementary Figure S3, Par̆enicová et al. 2003; Smaczniak et al. 2012a, 2012b)). Our protein sequence analysis found an average length of 193–210 aa for FLC proteins in eudicots and a slight reduction in size to 153–170 aa in monocot proteins. FUL proteins range in size between 240–260 aa across angiosperms. The MADS domain, conserved in all sequences, is here recovered in motifs 1 and 5. Domain I corresponds to motifs 3 in FUL sequences, 12 in MonFLC sequences and 14 in EudiFLC sequences. Domain K corresponds to motif 4 with 8 inside FLC and motif 2 in FUL proteins. FLC proteins have fewer diagnostic motifs in the C-terminal region, namely motif 20 in EudiFLC. Moreover, all MonFLC proteins have lost motif 4 in the C-terminal region (Supplementary Figure S3). Conversely, FUL proteins have more variation in C-terminal region. All FUL sequences have motifs 6, 7 and 10. Motif 6 corresponds to the canonical motif LLPAWML (Pabón-Mora et al. 2013; Pabon-Mora et al. 2014). The eudiAP1/FUL clade shares motif 15. The MonFUL proteins share motif 9. Motif 11 is specific to orchid MonFUL1, and Poaceae MonFUL1 shared motif 19. Furthermore, MonFUL2 have the diagnostic motifs 17 and 18.
To determine whether there were differences in selection acting on the different FLC/FUL clades, likelihood ratio tests (LRT) were carried out for the MADS, I and K domains. We were able to establish that both FLC and FUL genes are under purifying selection (ω0 = 0.4510) (Supplementary Table S4). However, strengthening degrees of purifying selection can be detected in EudiFLC (ωf = 0.4086 vs. ωb = 0.5102) and EudiAP1/FUL (ωf = 0.3761 vs. ωb = 0.4752). Nevertheless, the degree of purifying selection is significantly relaxed in MonFLC (ωf = 0.6191 vs. ωb = 0.4344), VRN1 (ωf = 0.4755 vs. ωb = 0.3742), MonFUL1 (ωf = 0.9332 vs. ωb = 0.4390) and MonFUL2 (ωf = 0.6250 vs. ωb = 0.3971), which coincides with variation in sequence and loss of some protein regions (i.e., loss of motifs 4, 6 and 8 in MonFLC genes). It also suggests a long-term functional maintenance in EudiFLC and EudiAP1/FUL and more diverging functions for the monocot counterparts, namely, in MonFLC, VRN1, MonFUL1 and MonFUL2 (Aagaard et al. 2006; Yang 2007).
SUPRESSOR of CONSTANS 1 (SOC) gene evolution
Searches for members of the MADS-box type II SOC1 genes resulted in 276 homologs from 94 species of flowering plants. These include 16 sequences from 11 species of early divergent angiosperms, 9 from 3 species of basal eudicots, 117 from 28 species of core eudicots, 19 from 9 species of non-orchid monocots, and finally, 115 correspond to 43 species belonging to Orchidaceae (Supplementary Table S1). We used AmtrSOC1L from Amborella trichopoda as an outgroup. Our ML topology found two duplication events prior to the core eudicot diversification giving rise to EudiAGL42/71/72 (UFBS = 100), EudiAGL14/19 (UFBS = 100) and EudiSOC1/AGL20 (UFBS = 100, Fig. 6). Inside EudiAGL42/71/72 two additional duplications have occurred in Brassicaceae (UFBS = 99 and UFBS = 100). Furthermore, within EudiAGL14/19 local duplication events can be traced to the Rubiaceae (UFBS = 100), the Solanaceae (UFBS = 100) and the Brassicaceae (UFBS = 100). Finally, two additional duplications have occurred in EudiSOC1/AGL20 inside Solanaceae (UFBS = 100 and UFBS = 100). Moreover, intraspecific duplications have found in Bocconia frutescens, Brunfelsia australis, Brassica rapa, Chloranthus spicatus, Coffea arabica, Cucumis sativus, Medicago trunculata, Papaver rhoeas, Populus tremuloides, Solanum lycopersicum, Streptosolen jamesonii and Tropaeolum longifolium.
In parallel, the phylogenetic tree recovers independent duplications in the monocot SOC1 homologs (MonSOC1L). There is at least one duplication occurring prior to the Orchidaceae diversification resulting in the OrchSOC1L1 (UFBS = 98) and OrchSOC1L2 (UFBS = 100), and an additional duplication after Vanilloideae diversification forming the clades OrchSOC1L1A (UFBS = 99) and OrchSOC1L1B (UFBS = 100) (Fig. 6). A separate duplication event has occurred in Poaceae (UFBS = 93). Finally, intraspecific duplications are found in Apostasia wallichii, Austrobaileya scandens, Cymbidium ensifolium, Cymbidium sinense, Dendrobium nobile, Gastrodia elata, Gomphichis scaposa, Habenaria delavayi, Masdevalia coccinea, Maxilaria aurea, Musa acuminata, Oncidium "Gower Ramsey", Phalaenopsis aphrodite, Phalaenopsis bellina, Tolumnia ´Cherry red x Ralph yagi´, Vanilla aphylla, Vanilla planifolia and Zea mays.
SOC1 proteins are MADS-box type II family members, hence the sequences show the presence of the typical MIKC domains and have an average length of 226–300 aa (Supplementary Figure S4, Par̆enicová et al. 2003; Smaczniak et al. 2012a, 2012b). The MADS domain is included in motifs 1 and 7 present in all SOC1 proteins. The I domain is recovered in motifs 3, 6 and with slight variations in motifs 10 or 14 in proteins of the MonSOC1L clade. The K domain is formed by motifs 2 and 5. At the C-terminal region, motif 4 is highly conserved and correspond to a diagnostic SOC1 sequence (DVETELYIGLP) within MADS-box proteins (Ding et al. 2013). Motifs 9 and 11 are specific to OrchSOC1L, and motif 13 is exclusive of OrchSOC1L1B. (Supplementary Figure S4).
To determine the selection acting on the different SOC1 clades, likelihood ratio tests were carried out for all MIKC domains. We were able to establish that SOC1 genes are under strong purifying selection (Supplementary Table S4). In effect, all comparisons show a strengthening degrees of purifying selection: EudiAGL42/71/72 (ωf = 0.0159 vs. ωb = 0.0526), EudiAGL14/19 (ωf = 0.0121 vs. ωb = 0.0564), EudiSOC1/AGL20 (ωf = 0.2208 vs. ωb = 0.0445), OrchSOC1L 1A (ωf = 0.0469 vs. ωb = 0.0483), OrchSOC1L 1B (ωf = 0.2208 vs. ωb = 0.0445) and OrchSOC1L 2 (ωf = 0.1903 vs. ωb = 0.0466). All the above analyses suggest conserved roles in function in all SOC1 proteins (Aagaard et al. 2006; Yang 2007).
Expression analysis of flowering candidate genes
We selected the terrestrial orchid Elleanthus aurantiacus for a complete flowering transition morpho-anatomical characterization followed by semi-quantitative RT-PCR and directed comparative transcriptomic analyses for all homologs of CO/COL4, FD, FLC/FUL and SOC1. The vegetative meristem (SAM) produces alternate leaves during almost two years. After floral induction, the axillary buds change their identity into a inflorescence meristem (IM) with a longitudinal enlarged dome capable of forming bracts in the flanks with axillary floral meristems. During the reproductive stage, the inflorescence meristems (IM) produces between 25 and 30 flowers per raceme (Fig. 7a). Because our goal was to record the expression patterns in different developmental stages during the vegetative to reproductive transition in this biannual flowering species, we dissected the SAM, IM, leaves and floral buds following Madrigal et al., (2021) (Fig. 7a). We isolated 7 COL/COL4 genes, namely, ElauCOL, ElauGHD7L, ElauGHD7L2, ElauCOL4A, ElauCOL4A2, ElauCOL4B and ElauCOL4B2. However, a closer inspection shows that ElauGHD7L and ElauCOL4B could be the result of alternative splicing from their larger isoforms ElauGHD7L2 and ElauCOL4B2 respectively. In turn, only the expression of the latter two is showed. ElauCOL and ElauCOL4A2 are expressed in leaves (L), the vegetative meristem (SAM) and the inflorescence meristem (IM). In contrast, ElauGHDL2, ElauCOL4A and ElauCOL4B2 are restricted to the IM. The two isolated FD genes: ElauFDL2A and ElauFDLB, are expressed in the SAM and the IM, but ElauFDL2A can also be detected in leaves. FUL genes include ElauFUL1A and ElauFUL1B with high expression levels in L, SAM and IM, and low expression levels in floral buds (FB) of ElauFUL1B. Finally, there are three SOC1 genes: ElauSOC1L1a and ElauSOC1L1b are expressed on L, SAM and IM, with low expression of ElauSOC1L1b in FB. Finally, ElauSOC1L2 is expressed in both in SAM and IM (Fig. 7b). Directed searches in our parallel RNA-seq experiments derived from tree replicates of SAM and IM in E. aurantiacus, validate these same expression patterns. Here, we used the highest standards of transcript normalization, and we rescued the same trends for all genes evaluated, with the exception of ElauCOL4A and ElauCOL4B2 that are highly expressed in both SAM and IM (Fig. 7c).
Discussion
Most studies have focused on identifying the FGRN in model species like Arabidopsis thaliana or Oryza sativa, or in crops, like canola, corn, pea, and tomato, to mention a few; however, comparative studies across flowering plants are still lacking. Notably, such studies aimed to identify and characterize members of the FGRN are still incipient in one of the richest groups of incredibly diverse floral forms with ornamental potential: the orchids. Comprehensive phylogenetic studies aimed to characterize the genetic complements of the FGRN in the Orchidaceae have been done for the FT and AGL24/SVP gene lineages. In both cases, the occurrence of several independent duplication events in monocots and eudicots has hindered a straightforward (or a one to one) comparison of the well-characterized FGRNs to orchids (Madrigal et al. 2021; Ospina-Zapata et al. 2020; Ramirez-Ramirez et al. 2021). Nevertheless, these analyses have been instrumental to tackle the complexity of the FGRN in terms of copy number, expression patterns, and the ecological links to flowering inductive conditions. In an effort to analyze all the remaining players of the FGRN we performed comprehensive phylogenetic analyses of all other members of the FGRN across flowering plants, with a focus on orchids. Here we identify large-scale duplication events, changes in the protein sequences after such duplications, variation in the evolutionary rates of resulting paralogous clades and targeted expression of isolated homologs in different orchids. Altogether the data presented here lays down a better framework to assess gene function of a restricted number of homologs identified more likely playing key roles during the flowering transition.
Numerous duplications with adaptable functional evolutionary trends in the COL/COL4 gene lineage
The B-box zinc finger protein family (BBX) is classified into five groups, of which, type I includes the Arabidopsis CONSTANS and CONSTANS Like 1—COL5 homologs. They are characterized by having three conserved domains: two B-box domains that function in protein–protein interaction and transcription regulation (Chou et al. 2013; Gangappa & Botto 2014; Griffiths et al. 2003), and one CCT (CO, CO-like, TOC1) domain that interacts with DNA (Griffiths et al. 2003; Song et al. 2012; Tiwari et al. 2010). In Arabidopsis is the CCT domain of CO the one that binds directly to the FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) promoter to induce flowering in long-days (Gangappa & Botto 2014; Tiwari et al. 2010). In addition to the duplication event that resulted in the COL and the COL4 genes, our ML topology recovers additional duplications inside COL4. This is in contrast to COL genes which are predominantly retained as single copy (Figs. 1, 2, 3, see exceptions in Simon et al. 2015). Our analyses also showed that while COL genes are under strengthening purifying selection, the COL4 homologs undergo relaxed purifying selection, which coincides with large variation in sequences, specifically inside monocots (Supplementary Table S2 and Figure S1).
The primarily single copy COL genes can function as photoperiodic sensors in long-day (LD) plants such as A. thaliana, neutral-day (ND) plants like Rosa chinensis (Balcerowicz 2021; Denoyes et al. 2020; Lu et al. 2020), or in short-day (SD) plants, such as Chenopodium rubrum (Drabešová et al. 2014), Hordeum vulgare (Campoli et al. 2012; Griffiths et al. 2003; Turner et al. 2005), Oryza sativa (Hayama et al. 2003; Yano et al. 2000), and Solanum tuberosum (González-Schain et al. 2012). Also, COL genes are linked to other day length-dependent developmental processes such as tuberization in potato (González-Schain et al. 2012), bud dormancy and metabolism in poplar (Böhlenius et al. 2006; Hsu et al. 2012), and lateral root formation and shoot branching in Arabidopsis (Datta et al. 2005). However, our sampling only recovered COL genes in a few members of the Epidendroideae and Apostasioideae, which suggests that COL genes are not actively transcribed in meristematic tissues, and perhaps do not play significant roles in the flowering processes of all orchid subfamilies. COL homologs have been characterized from Erycina pusilla (Chou et al. 2013), Phalaenopsis hybrida (Zhang et al. 2011), P. aphrodite (Ke et al. 2020), Oncidium ‘Gower Ramsey’ (Chang et al. 2011), and Dendrobium crumenatum (Kaewphalug et al. 2017). Heterologous overexpression of Phalaenopsis COL genes result in an early flowering phenotype under SD (Ke et al. 2020; Zhang et al. 2011). Interestingly, in the tropical species D. crumenatum, the DcCOL mRNA is accumulated in the dark in LD, ND, and SD, suggesting that the regulation of DcCOL is controlled in a circadian rhythm-dependent manner independent of light response, and that photoperiod is nor the only, neither the most critical, factor for floral induction in Dendrobium (Kaewphalug et al. 2017).
Conversely, COL4/GDH7 genes act as flowering repressors in both eudicots and monocots (Datta et al. 2005; Hassidim et al. 2009; Shrestha et al. 2014; Steinbach 2019). The canonical AtCOL4, AtCOL3 and AtCOL9 (in the EudiCOL4 clade) do so by controlling the expression of FT and SOC1 (Datta et al. 2005; Hassidim et al. 2009; Shrestha et al. 2014; Steinbach 2019). Orchids have greatly diversified their COL4 genes, especially in contrast to other monocots like grasses or other non-orchid Asparagales, which unlike orchids have large duplications in the paralogous GHD7-like genes (Fig. 3). In fact, COL4 copies were identified in all orchid subfamilies, and have duplicated once in Apostasioideae, once in Vanilloideae and on a separate event, prior to the diversification of all remaining Orchidaceae subfamilies. These large-scale duplications were supported by clear sequence divergence into different clades coming from all available orchid genomes. We also noticed an increase of species-specific duplications, however, since many sequences come from transcriptomes they could be instead splicing variants. Thus, species-specific duplications will require confirmation in the future when more genomes become available. Nevertheless, the fact that similar copy number is found in different vanilla species, some with and some without a reference genome is suggestive of true copy number increase in each taxa. In grasses, both GHD7 and COL4 homologs (especially those within the VRN2/GHD7 clade) are important for day length sensing, and their repressive activity over flowering promoters under non-inductive photoperiods (Kikuchi et al. 2012; Shrestha et al. 2014; Wei et al. 2010; Xue et al. 2008; Yan et al. 2011). In plants with vernalization requirements, like wheat and barley, VRN2 genes also act as flowering repressors (Woods et al. 2016). Reduction of barley BdVRN2 expression results in rapid flowering and elevated expression of BdFT and BdVRN1 (Distelfeld et al. 2009; Woods et al. 2016; Yan et al. 2004). Currently, no functional data is available for any COL4 orchid homolog, but it is tempting to speculate that an increase in COL4 gene copy number could be linked to a more sophisticated flowering repression in orchids, compared to other monocots, using active copies like GHD7, OrchCOL4A and OrhCOL4B (Fig. 7).
Finally, a close inspection of the available gene expression datasets for COL/COL4 homologs in different angiosperms species was used as a proxy to narrow down putative roles of the two gene groups. Our hypothesis was that if genes were largely restricted to leaves and the SAM, they were more likely to be repressing flowering, while if they were broadly expressed and remained active in the inflorescence meristems and floral buds were more likely to function as flowering promoters. However, most COL/COL4 homologs from Arabidopsis, maize, and rice, as well as in several orchids show broad expression in leaves, and the SAM, but are sometimes expressed in IM, and fewer times in flowers and even in seeds (Fig. 7, Supplementary Figure S5 and Tables S5–S8). Even directed searches of targeted genes in our RNA-seq experiments showed expression of COL4 genes in both vegetative and reproductive stages (Fig. 7c). Altogether, the data point to highly conserved COL genes in angiosperms, and a larger extent of duplication and sequence changes linked with possible functional diversification in the COL4 homologs, especially in orchids because their increased number of copies. However, expression patterns alone in this case, are not sufficient to postulate a repressive or promoting role in flowering for either of these genes.
Orchids have at least three FD copies more likely acting as flowering promoters.
FD is a basic leucine zipper (bZIP) transcription factor able to interact with diverse PEBP protein family members. Precisely, its specific interactions can result in flowering activating FD-FT or flowering repressive FD-TFL1 complexes (Ahn et al. 2006; Hanano and Goto 2011; Kaneko-suzuki et al. 2018; Wigge 2005). Across angiosperms FD complexes control flowering time and floral homeotic genes downstream, such as SOC1 (Jang et al. 2017; Smith et al. 2011), SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE3-5 (SPL3-5) (Jung et al. 2016), and LFY (Jung et al. 2016; Zhu et al. 2020) and AP1/FUL (Collani et al. 2019; Jang et al. 2017). We found that monocot species have two FD clades: MonFDL1 and MonFDL2 (Fig. 4), that are able to form FD-PEBP complexes. The maize DELAYED FLOWERING1 (DLF1, belonging to MonFDL1), the wheat FDL2/FDL6 (belonging to MonFDL1), the rice OsFD1 and OsFD4 (belonging to MonFDL1), and the orchid PaFD (belonging to MonFDL2-OrchFDL2A), can interact with FT homologs to promote flowering (Cerise et al. 2021; Jang et al. 2015; Li and Dubcovsky 2008; Meng et al. 2011; Muszynski et al. 2006; Taoka et al. 2011). Same transcription factors can interact with 14-3-3 and TFL1 proteins to antagonize FT protein during inflorescence development (Kaneko-suzuki et al. 2018). Similarly, copies OsFD2 and OsFD7 in rice (belonging to MonFDL1) form complexes involved in leaf development and panicle development, through the interaction with RFT (FT homolog) and Hd3a, respectively (Brambilla et al. 2017; Kaur et al. 2021; Tsuji et al. 2013). Interaction specificity relies upon the C-terminal region of FD, which contains the SAP motif targeted by calcium-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs). Moreover, it is well-established that phosphorylation is essential for the recognition of FD by 14-3-3 proteins and the formation of the flowering activation complex (Kaur et al. 2021; Taoka et al. 2011). Conversely, the unphosphorylated FD can interact with TFL1 via 14-3-3 proteins to prevent flowering and maintain the SAM (Collani et al. 2019).
Expression data of MonFDL1 homologs show high activity in vegetative and reproductive phases in rice, maize and Apostasia schenzhenica, with high levels of expression in storage organs in the latter (Supplementary Figure S6, Table S8, Tsuji et al. 2013). MonFDL2 homologs from orchids exhibit a more diverse range of expression patterns in roots (where available), leaves, SAM and IM (Fig. 7, Supplementary Figure S6 and Table S5–S8, (Tsuji et al. 2013)). Expression and functional analyses point to a likely conserved role of all monocot FD genes as flowering promoters as they maintain the ability to form complexes with 14-3-3 proteins and FT due to an intact SAP. However, other putative roles of FD in leaf development (Jang et al. 2017; Teper-Bamnolker and Samach 2005; Tsuji et al. 2013), stomatal opening (Kinoshita et al. 2011), inflorescence architecture (Endo-Higashi and Izawa 2011; Hiraoka et al. 2013; Kaneko-suzuki et al. 2018; Kaur et al. 2021; Lifschitz et al. 2006; Smith et al. 2011; Zhu et al. 2020), phytohormone signaling (Romera-Branchat et al. 2020) or storage organ development (Navarro et al. 2011; Teo et al. 2017) cannot be excluded for FD orchid homologs.
The canonical FLC flowering repressors are lacking in Orchidaceae
MADS-box genes in the FLC clade are critical negative flowering regulators in Arabidopsis thaliana that act in response to seasonal cues. FLC represses flowering, and only an extended exposure to low temperatures or vernalization, can repress the transcription of FLC and promote flowering (Alexandre and Hennig 2008; Gu et al. 2013; Helliwell et al. 2015; Lin et al. 2005; Madrid et al. 2021). Moreover, FLC target specificity is conferred by its interacting partners, the cofactors of the MADS-box proteins heterodimers, and chromatin remodeling complexes that define the spatiotemporal expression of downstream targets (Gu et al. 2013; Madrid et al. 2021). FLC genes are present in Poales (MonFLC) where they can also repress flowering. However, the monocot FLC genes are characterized by divergent, short protein sequences (Madrigal et al. 2021; Ruelens et al. 2013). Our data confirm that MonFLC genes have important losses in the C-terminal region motifs in comparison con EudiFLC, accompanied by characteristic signals of relaxed purifying selection, yet repressive roles in flowering are conserved in distantly related species (Fig. 5, Supplementary Figure S3, Supplementary Table S4). Strikingly, we did not recover FLC homologs from any available orchid genome, neither from any orchid transcriptome. This finding suggests that in temperate orchids, or tropical ones with cold treatments underlying flowering promotion, other flowering repressors different from FLC have to be in place (Alexandre and Hennig 2008; Madrigal et al. 2021; Ruelens et al. 2013). Putative factors able to take on flowering repressive roles in response to temperature changes include COL4, AGL24/SVP, SMZ/TOE3 or, less likely FUL (Chen and Dubcovsky 2012; Deng et al. 2011; Lee et al. 2013; Mathieu et al. 2009; Ramirez-Ramirez et al. 2021; Xie et al. 2021).
The contribution of other MADS-box genes involved in flowering transition to orchid reproduction.
Other MADS-box genes play key pleiotropic roles during flowering. Such is the case of AP1/FUL homologs often linked to positive regulation of the flowering transition (Jiang 2022; Jiang et al. 2022), floral meristem identity (Balanzà et al. 2019; Ferrándiz et al. 2000; Martínez-Fernández et al. 2020; Pabon-Mora et al. 2012), and cold response in vernalization-sensitive grasses (Chen and Dubcovsky 2012; Li et al. 2019; Preston and Kellogg 2007, 2008; Xie et al. 2021; Yan et al. 2003). FUL-like genes are increasingly diversified in monocots where they form two clades: MonFUL1, that includes the previously reported grass homologs VRN1 and FUL2; and MonFUL2 (named as FUL3 in Preston and Kellogg (2006); Fig. 5). VRN1 is the result of a specific duplication inside grasses, so the presence of pre-duplication copies of MonFUL1 in orchids reinforces the idea that the cold response mechanisms are very different from those occurring in grass seasonal species like barley, wheat or oat. In grasses, VRN1 is induced by vernalization and accelerates the transition to reproductive development at the shoot apex down regulating the activity of VRN2 in leaves (Chen and Dubcovsky 2012; Distelfeld et al. 2009; Preston and Kellogg 2008; Trevaskis et al. 2006; Yan et al. 2004). VRN1 can be epigenetically modified by histone modification complexes similar to those that repress FLC (Oliver et al. 2009; Trevaskis et al. 2003, 2007; Yan et al. 2003). However, it is also established that VRN1 genes are not essential for flowering in grasses and that other FUL homologs may be partially redundant in function during transition to flowering and during spikelet development (Li et al. 2019; Petersen et al. 2004; Preston and Kellogg 2006, 2008). The only functional study in orchids shows that early flowering occurs in response to overexpression of DoAP1 (from the MonFUL2 clade) from Dendrobium Chao Praya Smile in Arabidopsis (Sawettalake et al. 2017). In general, expression data available is broad and supports pleiotropic mostly promoter roles for all FUL-like genes in flowering transition in grasses (Supplementary Figure S8, (Preston & Kellogg 2008)), and in orchids (Fig. 6, Supplementary Tables S5-S8, (Goh and Yu 2000; Tian et al. 2013)). While the evolution of cold responsiveness in Poales seems to be related with the transition of Pooideae lineages from the tropics into temperate zones (Chen & Dubcovsky 2012; Woods et al. 2016), little is known about the ecological triggers and associated molecular mechanisms by which cold responses could have evolved in orchids.
Finally, the MADS-box gene SOC1 constitutes another important hub in the regulatory network underlying floral timing and flower development (Immink et al. 2012). SOC1 is regulated by the antagonistic CO and FLC, the former being a floral activator and the later behaving as a floral repressor (Lee and Lee 2010). CO activates SOC1 mainly through FT (Lee and Lee 2010). SOC1 together with AGL24 can regulate their mutual transcription to integrate flowering signals in the shoot apex from several genetic pathways, including the GA pathway and the flower initiation via LFY activation (Liu et al. 2008; Torti & Fornara 2012). SOC1 is repressed during flowering transition by FLC direct binding (Lee and Lee 2010). Conversely, SOC1 is downregulated in flowers by negative autoregulatory loops of MADS-box proteins like AP1, SEP3 an AG, in which SOC1 represses its own expression in combination with AG and API (Immink et al. 2012). Other SOC1-like related genes such as AGL42, AGL71 and AGL72 (EudiAGL42/71/72), are also involved in the promotion of flowering seemingly acting through a gibberellin-dependent pathway (Dorca-Fornell et al. 2011). XAANTAL2 (EudiAGL14 /19) is necessary and sufficient to induce flowering through the activation of AP1, and its regulation is important in floral meristem maintenance and determinacy (Garcı et al. 2015). Our results point to reiterative SOC1 gene duplications in eudicots, in contrast with the single clade in monocots, with duplications restricted only to Orchidaceae (Fig. 6). Expression of SOC-1 genes, like in the case of FUL-like genes, is broad and includes almost all stages from SAM to IM to FM (Dorca-Fornell et al. 2011; Garcı et al. 2015; Lee et al. 2004; Liu et al. 2008; Tadege et al. 2003) (Supplementary Table S5-S8, Fig. 7; S9). However, purifying selection is the rule in this gene lineage, suggesting functional conservation across angiosperms, which extrapolating from known functional data more likely corresponds to a positive regulation of flowering (Supplementary Figure S4, Table S4, (Ezoe et al. 2021)). In fact OsMADS50 (belonging to MonSOC1L) is an important flowering activator that controls various floral regulators in rice like OsMADS14 (FUL-like), OsMADS15 (FUL-like) and Hd3a (Lee et al. 2004). Moreover, the few studies assessing function by heterologous expression of orchid SOC-1 homologs in Arabidopsis do show early flowering (Liu et al. 2016), linked to the upregulation of AGL24 and LFY (Ding et al. 2013) supporting the idea of a general role of SOC1-like genes as flowering promoters. However, endogenous roles of SOC1 genes remain to be evaluated in orchids.
Conclusion and remarks
Gene duplication is the raw material for functional diversification and one of the key underlying mechanisms of emerging phenotypes and novel evolutionary features. In this study we analyzed the evolutionary history coupled with the available and new expression data of all flowering integrators Orchidaceae. Our data, together with previous data on orchid flowering regulators (Ospina-Zapata et al. 2020; Ramirez-Ramirez et al. 2021) and the information available from all orchid genomes, allowed us to conclude that: (1) The number of orchid homologs belonging to PEBP, AGL24/SVP, COL4, and FUL gene lineages is higher than in most other monocots including grasses due to orchid specific gene lineage duplications. The higher the copy number, the more likely it is for these gene lineages to diversify in function with respect to ancestral single copy genes. (2) Conversely, local duplications in Orchidaceae are mostly lacking in the COL, FD and SOC1 gene lineages, which points to a retention of key functions under strong purifying selection in essential signaling pathways (Ezoe et al. 2021). (3) Expression patterns of most flowering integrators are broad and include both vegetative and reproductive stages, as a result expression data are important but insufficient to assign a putative for each gene copy during flowering. (4) Grasses and orchids are evolutionarily prone to gene duplication events, but these have occurred independently in the two lineages, thus it is difficult to readily extrapolate the functions identified to many flowering genes in rice, maize, wheat, and barley to orchids. Based on the available data we compare the FGRNs in the grass model O. sativa and the terrestrial orchid Elleanthus aurantiacus. This FGRN serves as a reference for future detailed spatio-temporal expression and functional analyses, that can incorporate the evaluation of all active copies and their association with environmental cues like ambient temperature and light (Fig. 8). The putative orchid FGRN presented here retains the most important genes involved in flowering transition in grasses, incluiding flowering promoters like FT homologs, FD, COL, SOC1, FUL-like and LFY. Our model also recovers GHD7/COL4 and AGL24/SVP as the most likely flowering repressors in the absence of FLC. Finally, future validation of proposed model have to be done in order to asses to the interaction and represive or promotive function of the FGRN in different orchids with diverse habits, occupying distinct habitats.
Author contribution statement
Yesenia Madrigal: Conceptualization, Formal analyses, Data curation, Writing–original draft, Review & editing, Funding. Juan F. Alzate: Resources, Data curation, Review & editing. Natalia Pabón-Mora: Conceptualization, SEM photographs, Resources, Supervision, Writing–review & editing, Funding. All authors approve the final manuscript.
References
Aagaard JE, Willis JH, Phillips PC (2006) Relaxed selection among duplicate floral regulatory genes in Lamiales. J Mol Evol 63(4):493–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-005-0306-x
Abe M, Kobayashi Y, Yamamoto S, Daimon Y, Yamaguchi A, Ikeda Y, Ichinoki H, Notaguchi M, Goto K, Araki T (2005) FD, a bZIP protein mediating signals from the floral pathway integrator FT at the shoot apex. Sci (New York) 309(5737):1052–1056. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1115983
Ahn JH, Miller D, Winter VJ, Banfield MJ, Lee JH, Yoo SY, Henz SR, Brady RL, Weigel D (2006) A divergent external loop confers antagonistic activity on floral regulators FT and TFL1. EMBO J 25(3):605–614. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600950
Alexandre CM, Hennig L (2008) FLC or not FLC: the other side of vernalization. J Exp Bot 59(6):1127–1135. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ern070
Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215(3):403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2
Arango-Ocampo C, González F, Alzate JF, Pabón-Mora N (2016) The developmental and genetic bases of apetaly in Bocconia frutescens (Chelidonieae: Papaveraceae). EvoDevo 7(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13227-016-0054-6
Bailey TL, Boden M, Buske FA, Frith M, Grant CE, Clementi L, Ren J, Li WW, Noble WS (2009) MEME Suite: tools for motif discovery and searching. Nucleic Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp335
Bailey TL, Johnson J, Grant CE, Noble WS (2015) The MEME suite. Nucleic Acids Res 43(W1):W39–W49. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv416
Balanzà V, Martínez-Fernández I, Sato S, Yanofsky MF, Ferrándiz C (2019) Inflorescence meristem fate is dependent on seed development and FRUITFULL in Arabidopsis thaliana. Front Plant Sci 10(December):1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01622
Balcerowicz M (2021) Coming into bloom: a light-sensitive transcription factor complex tells roses when to flower. Plant Physiol 186(2):812–813. https://doi.org/10.1093/plphys/kiab124
Böhlenius H, Huang T, Charbonnel-Campaa L, Brunner AM, Jansson S, Strauss SH, Nilsson O (2006) CO/FT regulatory module controls timing of flowering and seasonal growth cessation in trees. Science 312(5776):1040–1043. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1126038
Brambilla V, Martignago D, Goretti D, Cerise M, Somssich M, De Rosa M, Galbiati F, Shrestha R, Lazzaro F, Simon R, Fornara F (2017) Antagonistic transcription factor complexes modulate the floral transition in rice. Plant Cell 29(11):2801–2816. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.17.00645
Campoli C, Drosse B, Searle I, Coupland G, von Korff M (2012) Functional characterisation of HvCO1, the barley (Hordeum vulgare) flowering time ortholog of CONSTANS: functional characterisation of HvCO1 in barley. Plant J 69(5):868–880. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04839.x
Carpenter EJ, Matasci N, Ayyampalayam S, Wu S, Sun J, Yu J, Jimenez Vieira FR, Bowler C, Dorrell RG, Gitzendanner MA, Li L, Du W, Ullrich K, Wickett NJ, Barkmann TJ, Barker MS, Leebens-Mack JH, Wong GKS (2019) Access to RNA-sequencing data from 1,173 plant species: the 1000 Plant transcriptomes initiative (1KP). GigaScience 8(10):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz126
Cerise M, Giaume F, Galli M, Khahani B, Lucas J, Podico F, Tavakol E, Parcy F, Gallavotti A, Brambilla V, Fornara F (2021) OsFD4 promotes the rice floral transition via florigen activation complex formation in the shoot apical meristem. New Phytol 229(1):429–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16834
Chang YY, Chu YW, Chen CW, Leu WM, Hsu HF, Yang CH (2011) Characterization of Oncidium “Gower Ramsey” transcriptomes using 454 GS-FLX pyrosequencing and their application to the identification of genes associated with flowering time. Plant Cell Physiol 52(9):1532–1545. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcr101
Chao YT, Yen SH, Yeh JH, Chen WC, Shih MC (2017) Orchidstra 20-A transcriptomics resource for the orchid family. Plant Cell Physiol 58(1):e9. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcw220
Chen A, Dubcovsky J (2012) Wheat TILLING mutants show that the vernalization gene VRN1 down-regulates the flowering repressor VRN2 in leaves but is not essential for flowering. PLoS Gene. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003134
Choi SC, Lee S, Kim SR, Lee YS, Liu C, Cao X, An G (2014) Trithorax group protein Oryza sativa trithorax1 controls flowering time in rice via interaction with early heading date3. Plant Physiol. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.228049
Chou ML, Shih MC, Chan MT, Liao SY, Hsu CT, Haung YT, Chen JJW, Liao DC, Wu FH, Lin CS (2013) Global transcriptome analysis and identification of a CONSTANS-like gene family in the orchid Erycina pusilla. Planta 237(6):1425–1441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-013-1850-z
Collani S, Neumann M, Yant L, Schmid M (2019) FT modulates genome-wide DNA-binding of the bZIP transcription factor FD. Plant Physiol 180(1):367–380. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.18.01505
Datta S, Hettiarachchi GHCM, Deng X-W, Holm M (2005) Arabidopsis CONSTANS-LIKE3 is a positive regulator of red light signaling and root growth. Plant Cell 18(1):70–84. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.105.038182
Deng W, Ying H, Helliwell CA, Taylor JM, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES (2011) FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC) regulates development pathways throughout the life cycle of Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(16):6680–6685. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1103175108
Denoyes B, Gaston A, Rothan C (2020) Make it bloom! CONSTANS contributes to day neutrality in rose. J Exp Bot 71(14):3923–3926. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa270
Ding L, Wang Y, Yu H (2013) Overexpression of DOSOC1, an ortholog of Arabidopsis SOC1, promotes flowering in the orchid dendrobium chao parya smile. Plant Cell Physiol 54(4):595–608. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pct026
Distelfeld A, Dubcovsky J (2010) Characterization of the maintained vegetative phase deletions from diploid wheat and their effect on VRN2 and FT transcript levels. Mol Genet Genom 283(3):223–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00438-009-0510-2
Distelfeld A, Tranquilli G, Li C, Yan L, Dubcovsky J (2009) Genetic and molecular characterization of the VRN Loci in tetraploid wheat. Plant Physiol 149(1):245–257. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.108.129353
Doi K, Izawa T, Fuse T, Yamanouchi U, Kubo T, Shimatani Z, Yano M, Yoshimura A (2004) Ehd1, a B-type response regulator in rice, confers short-day promotion of flowering and controls FT-like gene expression independently of Hd1. Genes Dev 18(8):926–936. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1189604
Dorca-Fornell C, Gregis V, Grandi V, Coupland G, Colombo L, Kater MM (2011) The Arabidopsis SOC1-like genes AGL42, AGL71 and AGL72 promote flowering in the shoot apical and axillary meristems. Plant J 67(6):1006–1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04653.x
Drabešová J, Cháb D, Kolář J, Haškovcová K, Štorchová H (2014) A dark-light transition triggers expression of the floral promoter CrFTL1 and downregulates CONSTANS-like genes in a short-day plant Chenopodium rubrum. J Exp Bot 65(8):2137–2146. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eru073
Endo-Higashi N, Izawa T (2011) Flowering time genes heading date 1 and early heading date 1 together control panicle development in rice. Plant Cell Physiol 52:6. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcr059
Ezoe A, Shirai K, Hanada K (2021) Degree of functional divergence in duplicates is associated with distinct roles in plant evolution. Mol Biol Evol 38(4):1447–1459. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa302
Ferrándiz C, Gu Q, Martienssen R, Yanofsky MF (2000) Redundant regulation of meristem identity and plant architecture by FRUITFULL, APETALA1 and CAULIFLOWER. Development 734:725–734
Fornara F, Gregis V, Pelucchi N, Colombo L, Kater M (2008) The rice StMADS11-like genes OsMADS22 and OsMADS47 cause floral reversions in Arabidopsis without complementing the svp and agl24 mutants. J Exp Bot 59(8):2181–2190. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ern083
Gangappa SN, Botto JF (2014) The BBX family of plant transcription factors. Trends Plant Sci 19(7):460–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2014.01.010
Garcı B, Ugartechea-chirino Y, Villajuana-bonequi M, Folter SD, Azpeitia E, Garay-arroyo A, Cruz-sa D, Este JM (2015) XAANTAL2 ( AGL14) is an important component of the complex gene regulatory network that underlies Arabidopsis shoot apical meristem transitions. Mol Plant 8(May):796–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2015.01.017
Goh CJ, Yu H (2000) Differential gene expression during floral transition in an orchid hybrid Dendrobium Madame Thong-In. Plant Cell Rep 19:926–931
González-Schain ND, Díaz-Mendoza M, Żurczak M, Suárez-López P (2012) Potato CONSTANS is involved in photoperiodic tuberization in a graft-transmissible manner: regulation of tuberization by potato CONSTANS. Plant J 70(4):678–690. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2012.04909.x
Greenup AG, Sasani S, Oliver SN, Talbot MJ, Dennis ES, Hemming MN, Trevaskis B (2010) ODDSOC2 is a MADS box floral repressor that is down-regulated by vernalization in temperate cereals. Plant Physiol 153(3):1062–1073. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.152488
Griffiths S, Dunford RP, Coupland G, Laurie DA (2003) The evolution of CONSTANS-like gene families in barley, rice, and Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 131(4):1855–1867. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.016188
Gu X, Le C, Wang Y, Li Z, Jiang D, Wang Y, He Y (2013) Arabidopsis FLC clade members form flowering-repressor complexes coordinating responses to endogenous and environmental cues. Nat Commun 4(1):1947. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2947
Gu H, Zhang K, Chen J, Gull S, Chen C, Hou Y, Li X, Miao J, Zhou Y, Liang G (2022) OsFTL4, an FT-like gene, regulates flowering time and drought tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Rice 15(1):47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12284-022-00593-1
Hanano S, Goto K (2011) Arabidopsis TERMINAL FLOWER1 Is involved in the regulation of flowering time and inflorescence development through transcriptional repression. Plant Cell 23(September):3172–3184. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.111.088641
Hassidim M, Harir Y, Yakir E, Kron I, Green RM (2009) Over-expression of CONSTANS-LIKE 5 can induce flowering in short-day grown Arabidopsis. Planta 230(3):481–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-009-0958-7
Hayama R, Yokoi S, Tamaki S, Yano M, Shimamoto K (2003) Adaptation of photoperiodic control pathways produces short-day flowering in rice. Nature 422(6933):719–722. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01549
Helliwell CA, Anderssen RS, Robertson M, Finnegan EJ (2015) How is FLC repression initiated by cold? Trends Plant Sci 20(2):76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2014.12.004
Hew CS, Yong JWH (2004) The physiology of tropical orchids in relation to the industry. Physiol Trop Orchids Relat Ind. https://doi.org/10.1142/5505
Higgins JA, Bailey PC, Laurie DA (2010) Comparative genomics of flowering time pathways using Brachypodium distachyon as a model for the temperate grasses. PLoS ONE 5(4):e10065. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010065
Hiraoka K, Yamaguchi A, Abe M, Araki T (2013) The Florigen Genes FT and TSF modulate lateral shoot outgrowth in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 54(3):352–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcs168
Hoang DT, Chernomor O, Von Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS (2018) UFBoot2: Improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Mol Biol Evol 35(2):518–522. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msx281
Hsu C-Y, Adams JP, No K, Liang H, Meilan R, Pechanova O, Barakat A, Carlson JE, Page GP, Yuceer C (2012) Overexpression of constans homologs CO1 and CO2 fails to alter normal reproductive onset and fall bud set in woody perennial poplar. PLoS ONE 7(9):e45448. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045448
Huang J-Z, Bolaños-Villegas P, Chen F-C (2021) Regulation of flowering in orchids. Springer Int Publish. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66826-6_6
Immink RGH, Posé D, Ferrario S, Ott F, Kaufmann K, Valentim FL, de Folter S, van der Wal F, van Dijk ADJ, Schmid M, Angenent GC (2012) Characterization of SOC1’s central role in flowering by the identification of its upstream and downstream regulators. Plant Physiol 160(1):433–449. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.112.202614
Itoh JI, Nonomura KI, Ikeda K, Yamaki S, Inukai Y, Yamagishi H, Kitano H, Nagato Y (2005) Rice plant development: from zygote to spikelet. Plant Cell Physiol 46(1):23–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pci501
Jang S (2015) Functional characterization of PhapLEAFY, a FLORICAULA/LEAFY Ortholog in phalaenopsis aphrodite. Plant Cell Physiol 56(11):2234–2247. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcv130
Jang S, Choi SC, Li HY, An G, Schmelzer E (2015) Functional characterization of phalaenopsis aphrodite flowering genes PaFT1 and PaFD. PLoS ONE 10(8):1–29. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134987
Jang S, Li HY, Kuo ML (2017) Ectopic expression of Arabidopsis FD and FD PARALOGUE in rice results in dwarfism with size reduction of spikelets. Sci Rep 7(128):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44477
Jiang X, Lubini G, Hernandes-Lopes J, Rijnsburger K, Veltkamp V, de Maagd RA, Angenent GC, Bemer M (2022) FRUITFULL-like genes regulate flowering time and inflorescence architecture in tomato. Plant Cell 34(3):1002–1019. https://doi.org/10.1093/plcell/koab298
Jiang X (2022) The role of FRUITFULL-like genes in the tomato flowering regulatory network [Wageningen University]. https://doi.org/10.18174/562882
Jung JH, Lee HJ, Ryu JY, Park CM (2016) SPL3/4/5 integrate developmental aging and photoperiodic signals into the FT-FD module in Arabidopsis flowering. Mol Plant 9(12):1647–1659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2016.10.014
Kaewphalug W, Huehne PS, Sriboonlert A (2017) Characterization of a CONSTANS-like Gene from Pigeon Orchid (Dendrobium crumenatum Swartz ) and its expression under different photoperiod conditions. Hortic J 86(2):252–262. https://doi.org/10.2503/hortj.MI-123
Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TKF, Von Haeseler A, Jermiin LS (2017) ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat Methods 14(6):587–589. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4285
Kaneko-suzuki M, Kurihara-ishikawa R, Okushita-terakawa C, Kojima C, Nagano-fujiwara M, Ohki I, Tsuji H, Shimamoto K, Taoka K (2018) TFL1-Like proteins in rice antagonize rice FT-like protein in inflorescence development by competition for complex formation with 14–3-3 and FD. Plant Cell Physiol 59(3):458–468. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcy021
Katoh K, Rozewicki J, Yamada KD (2018) MAFFT online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Brief Bioinform 20(4):1160–1166. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbx108
Kaur A, Nijhawan A, Yadav M, Khurana JP (2021) OsbZIP62/OsFD7, a functional ortholog of FLOWERING LOCUS D, regulates floral transition and panicle development in rice. J Exp Bot 72(22):7826–7845. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erab396
Ke YT, Lin KF, Gu CH, Yeh CH (2020) Molecular characterization and expression profile of pacol1, a constans-like gene in phalaenopsis orchid. Plants 9(1):1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9010068
Khanna R, Kronmiller B, Maszle DR, Coupland G, Holm M, Mizuno T, Wu S-H (2009) The Arabidopsis B-box zinc finger family. Plant Cell 21(11):3416–3420. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.109.069088
Kikuchi R, Kawahigashi H, Oshima M, Ando T, Handa H (2012) The differential expression of HvCO9, a member of the CONSTANS-like gene family, contributes to the control of flowering under short-day conditions in barley. J Exp Bot 63(2):773–784. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err299
Kinoshita T, Ono N, Hayashi Y, Morimoto S, Nakamura S, Soda M, Kato Y, Ohnishi M, Nakano T, Inoue S, Shimazaki K (2011) FLOWERING LOCUS T regulates stomatal opening. Curr Biol 21(14):1232–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.06.025
Kojima S, Takahashi Y, Kobayashi Y, Monna L, Sasaki T, Araki T, Yano M (2002) Hd3a, a rice ortholog of the Arabidopsis FT gene, promotes transition to flowering downstream of Hd1 under short-day conditions. Plant Cell Physiol 43(10):1096–1105
Komiya R, Ikegami A, Tamaki S, Yokoi S, Shimamoto K (2008) Hd3a and RFT1 are essential for flowering in rice. Development 135:767–774. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.008631
Larsson A (2014) AliView: A fast and lightweight alignment viewer and editor for large datasets. Bioinformatics 30(22):3276–3278. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu531
Lee YS, An G (2015) Regulation of flowering time in rice. J Plant Biol 58(6):353–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12374-015-0425-x
Lee J, Lee I (2010) Regulation and function of SOC1, a flowering pathway integrator. J Exp Bot 61(9):2247–2254. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq098
Lee S, Kim J, Han JJ, Han MJ, An G (2004) Functional analyses of the flowering time gene OsMADS50, the putative suppressor of overexpression of CO 1/Agamous-Like 20 (SOC1/AGL20) ortholog in rice. Plant J 38(5):754–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2004.02082.x
Lee JH, Park SH, Ahn JH (2012) Functional conservation and diversification between rice OsMADS22/OsMADS55 and Arabidopsis SVP proteins. Plant Sci 185–186:97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2011.09.003
Lee JH, Ryu H-SHS, Chung KS, Posé D, Kim S, Schmid M, Ahn JH, Pose D, Kim S, Schmid M, Ahn JH (2013) Regulation of temperature-responsive flowering by MADS-box transcription factor repressors. Science 342(6158):628–632. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1241097
Leiboff S, Hake S (2019) Reconstructing the transcriptional ontogeny of maize and sorghum supports an inverse hourglass model of inflorescence development. Curr Biol 29(20):3410-3419.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.08.044
Levy YY, Dean C (1998) The transition to flowering. Plant Cell 10(12):1973–1989
Li C, Dubcovsky J (2008) Wheat FT protein regulates VRN1 transcription through interactions with FDL2. Plant J 55(4):543–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03526.x
Li C, Lin H, Chen A, Lau M, Jernstedt J, Dubcovsky J (2019) Wheat VRN1, FUL2 and FUL3 play critical and redundant roles in spikelet development and spike determinacy. Dev (Cambridge). https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.175398
Lifschitz E, Eviatar T, Rozman A, Shalit A, Goldshmidt A, Amsellem Z, Alvarez JP, Eshed Y (2006) The tomato FT ortholog triggers systemic signals that regulate growth and flowering and substitute for diverse environmental stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(16):6398–6403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0601620103
Lin SI, Wang JG, Poon SY, Su CL, Wang SS, Chiou TJ (2005) Differential regulation of FLOWERING LOCUS C expression by vernalization in cabbage and arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 137(3):1037–1048. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.058974
Liu C, Chen H, Er HL, Soo HM, Kumar PP, Han JH, Liou YC, Yu H (2008) Direct interaction of AGL24 and SOC1 integrates flowering signals in Arabidopsis. Development 135(8):1481–1491. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.020255
Liu X-R, Pan T, Liang W-Q, Gao L, Wang X-J, Li H-Q, Liang S (2016) Overexpression of an orchid (Dendrobium nobile) SOC1/TM3-Like Ortholog, DnAGL19, in Arabidopsis regulates HOS1-FT expression. Front Plant Sci 7(February):1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00099
Lu J, Sun J, Jiang A, Bai M, Fan C, Liu J, Ning G, Wang C (2020) Alternate expression of CONSTANS-LIKE 4 in short days and CONSTANS in long days facilitates day-neutral response in Rosa chinensis. J Exp Bot 71(14):4057–4068. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa161
Madrid E, Chandler JW, Coupland G (2021) Gene regulatory networks controlled by FLOWERING LOCUS C that confer variation in seasonal flowering and life history. J Exp Bot 72(1):4–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa216
Madrigal Y, Alzate JFJF, Pabón-Mora N (2017) Evolution and expression patterns of TCP genes in asparagales. Front Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00009
Madrigal Y, Ospina-Zapata D, Ramírez-Ramírez JA, Alzate JF, Pabón-Mora N (2021) Assessing the flowering genetic regulatory network in neotropical orchids. Biol Life Sci Forum 4:53. https://doi.org/10.3390/iecps2020-08576
Maheepala DC, Emerling CA, Rajewski A, Macon J, Strahl M, Pabón-Mora N, Litt A (2019) Evolution and diversification of FRUITFULL genes in Solanaceae. Front Plant Sci 10:43. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00043
Martínez-Fernández I, de Moura SM, Alves-Ferreira M, Ferrándiz C, Balanzà V (2020) Identification of players controlling meristem arrest downstream of the FRUITFULL-APETALA2 pathway. Plant Physiol 184(2):945–959. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.20.00800
Mathieu J, Yant LJ, Mürdter F, Küttner F, Schmid M (2009) Repression of Flowering by the miR172 Target SMZ. PLoS Biol 7(7):e1000148. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000148
McKeown M, Schubert M, Marcussen T, Fjellheim S, Preston JC (2016) Evidence for an early origin of vernalization responsiveness in temperate pooideae grasses. Plant Physiol 172(1):416–426. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.01023
Meng X, Muszynski MG, Danilevskaya ON (2011) The FT-like ZCN8 gene functions as a floral activator and is involved in photoperiod sensitivity in maize. Plant Cell 23(3):942–960. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.110.081406
Michaels SD, Amasino RM (1999) FLOWERING LOCUS C encodes a novel MADS domain protein that acts as a repressor of flowering. Plant Cell. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.11.5.949
Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, Schrempf D, Woodhams MD, Von Haeseler A, Lanfear R, Teeling E (2020) IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Mol Biol Evol 37(5):1530–1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa015
Muszynski MG, Dam T, Li B, Shirbroun DM, Hou Z, Bruggemann E, Archibald R, Ananiev EV, Danilevskaya ON (2006) Delayed flowering1 encodes a basic leucine zipper protein that mediates floral inductive signals at the shoot apex in maize. Plant Physiol 142(4):1523–1536. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.088815
Navarro C, Abelenda JA, Cruz-Oró E, Cuéllar CA, Tamaki S, Silva J, Shimamoto K, Prat S (2011) Control of flowering and storage organ formation in potato by FLOWERING LOCUS T. Nature 478(7367):119–122. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10431
Nguyen LT, Schmidt HA, Von Haeseler A, Minh BQ (2015) IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 32(1):268–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu300
Oliver SN, Finnegan EJ, Dennis ES, Peacock WJ, Trevaskis B (2009) Vernalization-induced flowering in cereals is associated with changes in histone methylation at the VERNALIZATION1 gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(20):8386–8391. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903566106
Ortiz-Ramírez CI, Plata-Arboleda S, Pabón-Mora N (2018) Evolution of genes associated with gynoecium patterning and fruit development in Solanaceae. Ann Bot February. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcy007
Ospina-Zapata DA, Madrigal Y, Alzate JF, Pabón-Mora N (2020) Evolution and expression of reproductive transition regulatory genes FT/TFL1 with emphasis in selected neotropical orchids. Front Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00469
Owens NDL, De Domenico E, Gilchrist MJ (2019) An RNA-seq protocol for differential expression analysis. Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2019(6):498–506. https://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot098368
Pabon-Mora N, Ambrose B, Litt A (2012) Poppy APETALA1/FRUITFULL orthologs control flowering time, branching, perianth identity, and fruit development. Plant Physiol 158(4):1685–1704. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.111.192104
Pabon-Mora N, Wong GK-S, Ambrose BA (2014) Evolution of fruit development genes in flowering plants. Front Plant Sci 5(June):300. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00300
Pabón-mora N, Hidalgo O, Gleissberg S, Litt A (2013) Assessing duplication and loss of APETALA1/FRUITFULL homologs in Ranunculales. Front Plant Sci 4(September):358. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00358
Pabón-Mora N, Suárez-Baron H, Ambrose BA, González F (2015) Flower development and perianth identity candidate genes in the basal angiosperm Aristolochia fimbriata (Piperales: Aristolochiaceae). Front Plant Sci 6:1095. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01095
Pabón-Mora N, Suárez-Baron H, Madrigal Y, Alzate JF, González F (2023) Expression and functional studies of leaf, floral, and fruit developmental genes in non-model species. In: Riechmann JL, Ferrándiz C (eds) Flower Development. Springer, US, pp 365–401
Parcy F (2005) Flowering: a time for integration. Int J Dev Biol 49(5–6):585–593. https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.041930fp
Parenicova L, de Folter S, Kieffer M, Horner DS, Favalli C, Busscher J, Cook HE, Ingram RM, Kater MM, Davies B, Angenent GC (2003) Molecular and phylogenetic analyses of the complete MADS-Box transcription factor family in arabidopsis. Plant Cell 15(7):1538–1551. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.011544
Peréz-mesa P, Suárez-baron H, Ambrose BA, Gonzaláz F, Pabon-Mora N (2019) Floral MADS-box protein interactions in the early diverging angiosperm Aristolochia fimbriata Cham. (Aristolochiaceae: Piperales ). Evol Dev 21(2):96–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/ede.12282
Petersen K, Didion T, Andersen CH, Nielsen KK (2004) MADS-box genes from perennial ryegrass differentially expressed during transition from vegetative to reproductive growth. J Plant Physiol 161(4):439–447. https://doi.org/10.1078/0176-1617-01212
Preston JC, Kellogg EA (2006) Reconstructing the evolutionary history of paralogous APETALA1/FRUITFULL- like genes in grasses (Poaceae). Genetics 174(1):421–437. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.106.057125
Preston JC, Kellogg EA (2007) Conservation and divergence of APETALA1/FRUITFULL-like gene function in grasses: evidence from gene expression analyses. Plant J 52(1):69–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03209.x
Preston JC, Kellogg EA (2008) Discrete developmental roles for temperate cereal grass Vernalization1/fruitfull-like genes in flowering competency and the transition to flowering. Plant Physiol 146(1):265–276. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.107.109561
Qin Z, Wu J, Geng S, Feng N, Chen F, Kong X, Song G, Chen K, Li A, Mao L, Wu L (2017) Regulation of FT splicing by an endogenous cue in temperate grasses. Nat Commun 8(14320):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14320
Ramirez-Ramirez JA, Madrigal Y, Alzate JF, Pabón-Mora N (2021) Evolution and expression of the MADS-box flowering transition genes AGAMOUS-like 24/SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE with emphasis in selected Neotropical orchids. Cells Dev October. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdev.2021.203755
Rao N, Prasad K, Kumar PR, Vijayraghavan U (2008) Distinct regulatory role for RFL, the rice LFY homolog, in determining flowering time and plant architecture. PNAS 105(9):3646–3651. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709059105
Romera-Branchat M, Severing E, Pocard C, Ohr H, Vincent C, Née G, Martinez-Gallegos R, Jang S, Lalaguna FA, Madrigal P, Coupland G (2020) Functional divergence of the arabidopsis florigen-interacting bZIP transcription factors FD and FDP. Cell Rep 31:9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107717
Ruelens P, Maagd RAD, Proost S, Geuten K, Kaufmann K (2013) FLOWERING LOCUS C in monocots and the tandem origin of angiosperm-specific MADS-box genes. Nat Commun 4:2280. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3280
Salazar-Duque H, Alzate JF, Urrea Trujillo A, Ferrándiz C, Pabón-Mora N (2021) Comparative anatomy and genetic bases of fruit development in selected Rubiaceae (Gentianales). Am J Bot 108(10):1838–1860. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1785
Sawettalake N, Bunnag S, Wang Y, Shen L, Lalaguna FA, Shen L (2017) DOAP1 promotes flowering in the orchid dendrobium Chao Praya smile. Front Plant Sci 8(March):400. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00400
Searle I, He Y, Turck F, Vincent C, Fornara F, Kröber S, Amasino RA, Coupland G (2006) The transcription factor FLC confers a flowering response to vernalization by repressing meristem competence and systemic signaling in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.373506
Shrestha R, Gómez-Ariza J, Brambilla V, Fornara F (2014) Molecular control of seasonal flowering in rice, arabidopsis and temperate cereals. Ann Bot 114(7):1445–1458. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcu032
Simon S, Ruhl M, De Montaigu A, Wotzel S, Coupland G (2015) Evolution of CONSTANS regulation and function after gene duplication produced a photoperiodic flowering switch in the brassicaceae. Mol Biol Evol 32(9):2284–2301. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msv110
Smaczniak C, Immink RGH, Angenent GC, Kaufmann K (2012a) Developmental and evolutionary diversity of plant MADS-domain factors: Insights from recent studies. Development 139(17):3081–3098. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.074674
Smaczniak C, Immink RGH, Muiño JM, Blanvillain R, Busscher M (2012b) Characterization of MADS-domain transcription factor complexes in Arabidopsis fl ower development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(5):1560–1565. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1112871109
Smith HMS, Ung N, Lal S, Courtier J (2011) Specification of reproductive meristems requires the combined function of SHOOT MERISTEMLESS and floral integrators FLOWERING LOCUS T and FD during Arabidopsis inflorescence development. J Exp Bot 62(2):583–593. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq296
Song J, Angel A, Howard M, Dean C (2012) Vernalization—A cold-induced epigenetic switch. J Cell Sci 125(Pt 16):3723–3731. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.084764
Steinbach Y (2019) The arabidopsis thaliana CONSTANS-LIKE 4 (COL4)–a modulator of flowering time. Front Plant Sci 10(May):1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00651
Tadege M, Sheldon CC, Helliwell CA, Upadhyaya NM, Dennis ES, Peacock WJ (2003) Reciprocal control of flowering time by OsSOC1 in transgenic Arabidopsis and by FLC in transgenic rice. Plant Biotechnol J 1(5):361–369. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-7652.2003.00034.x
Tamaki S, Matsuo S, Wong HL, Yokoi S, Shimamoto K (2007) Hd3a protein is a mobile flowering signal in rice. Science 316(5):1033–1036. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1141753
Tanaka W, Pautler M, Jackson D, Hirano HY (2013) Grass meristems II: inflorescence architecture, flower development and meristem fate. Plant Cell Physiol 54(3):313–324. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pct016
Taoka KI, Ohki I, Tsuji H, Furuita K, Hayashi K, Yanase T, Yamaguchi M, Nakashima C, Purwestri YA, Tamaki S, Ogaki Y, Shimada C, Nakagawa A, Kojima C, Shimamoto K (2011) 14–3-3 proteins act as intracellular receptors for rice Hd3a florigen. Nature 476(7360):332–335. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10272
Taoka K, Ohki I, Tsuji H, Kojima C, Shimamoto K (2013) Structure and function of florigen and the receptor complex. Trends Plant Sci 18(5):287–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2013.02.002
Teo CJ, Takahashi K, Shimizu K, Shimamoto K, Taoka KI (2017) Potato tuber induction is regulated by interactions between components of a tuberigen complex. Plant Cell Physiol 58(2):365–374. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcw197
Teper-Bamnolker P, Samach A (2005) The flowering integrator FT regulates SEPALLATA3and FRUITFULL accumulation in arabidopsis leaves. Plant Cell 17(10):2661–2675. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.105.035766
Tian Y, Yuan X, Jiang S, Cui B, Su J (2013) Molecular cloning and spatiotemporal expression of an APETALA1/FRUITFULL-like MADS-box gene from the orchid (Cymbidium faberi). Shengwu Gongcheng Xuebao/chinese J Biotechnol 29(2):203–213
Tiwari SB, Shen Y, Chang H, Hou Y, Harris A, Ma SF, McPartland M, Hymus GJ, Adam L, Marion C, Belachew A, Repetti PP, Reuber TL, Ratcliffe OJ (2010) The flowering time regulator CONSTANS is recruited to the FLOWERING LOCUS T promoter via a unique cis-element. New Phytol 187(1):57–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03251.x
Torti S, Fornara F (2012) AGL24 acts in concert with SOC1 and FUL during arabidopsis floral transition. Plant Signal Behav 7(10):1251–1254. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.21552
Trevaskis B, Bagnall DJ, Ellis MH, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES (2003) MADS box genes control vernalization-induced flowering in cereals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(22):13099–13104. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1635053100
Trevaskis B, Hemming MN, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES (2006) HvVRN2 responds to daylength, whereas HvVRN1 is regulated by vernalization and developmental status. Plant Physiol 140(4):1397–1405. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.105.073486
Trevaskis B, Hemming MN, Dennis ES, Peacock WJ (2007) The molecular basis of vernalization-induced flowering in cereals. Trends Plant Sci 12(8):352–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2007.06.010
Tsai W-C, Fu C-H, Hsiao Y-Y, Huang Y-M, Chen L-J, Wang M, Liu Z-J, Chen H-H (2013) OrchidBase 2.0: Comprehensive collection of Orchidaceae floral transcriptomes. Plant Cell Physiol 54(2):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcs187
Tsuji H, Tamaki S, Komiya R, Shimamoto K (2008) Florigen and the photoperiodic control of flowering in rice. Rice 1(1):25–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12284-008-9005-8
Tsuji H, Nakamura H, Taoka K, Shimamoto K (2013) Functional diversification of FD transcription factors in rice, components of florigen activation complexes. Plant Cell Physiol 54(3):385–397. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pct005
Turner A, Beales J, Faure S, Dunford RP, Laurie DA (2005) The Pseudo-response regulator Ppd-H1 provides adaptation to photoperiod in Barley. Science 310(5750):1031–1034. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1117619
Valoroso MC, Censullo MC, Aceto S (2019) The MADS-box genes expressed in the inflorescence of Orchis italica (Orchidaceae). PLoS ONE 14(3):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213185
Wang H, Tong C, Jang S (2017) Current progress in orchid flowering/flower development research. Plant Signal Behav 12(5):e1322245
Wang SL, Viswanath KK, Tong CG, An HR, Jang S, Chen FC (2019) Floral Induction and flower development of orchids. Front Plant Sci 10(October):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01258
Wei X, Xu J, Guo H, Jiang L, Chen S, Yu C, Zhou Z, Hu P, Zhai H, Wan J (2010) DTH8 suppresses flowering in rice, influencing plant height and yield potential simultaneously. Plant Physiol 153(4):1747–1758. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.156943
Wigge PA (2005) Integration of spatial and temporal information during floral induction in arabidopsis. Science 309(5737):1056–1059. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1114358
Woods DP, McKeown MA, Dong Y, Preston JC, Amasino RM (2016) Evolution of VRN2/Ghd7-like genes in vernalization-mediated repression of grass flowering. Plant Physiol 170(4):2124–2135. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.15.01279
Xie L, Zhang Y, Wang K, Luo X, Xu D, Tian X, Li L, Ye X, Xia X, Li W, Yan L, Cao S (2021) TaVrt2, an SVP-like gene, cooperates with TaVrn1 to regulate vernalization-induced flowering in wheat. New Phytol 231(2):834–848. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16339
Xue W, Xing Y, Weng X, Zhao Y, Tang W, Wang L, Zhou H, Yu S, Xu C, Li X, Zhang Q (2008) Natural variation in Ghd7 is an important regulator of heading date and yield potential in rice. Nat Gene. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.143
Yan L, Loukoianov A, Tranquilli G, Helguera M, Fahima T, Dubcovsky J (2003) Positional cloning of the wheat vernalization gene VRN1. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(10):6263–6268. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0937399100
Yan L, Loukoianov A, Blechl A, Tranquilli G, Ramakrishna W, SanMiguel P, Bennetzen JL, Echenique V, Dubcovsky J (2004) The wheat VRN2 gene is a flowering repressor down-regulated by vernalization. Science 303(5664):1640–1644. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094305
Yan W-H, Wang P, Chen H-X, Zhou H-J, Li Q-P, Wang C-R, Ding Z-H, Zhang Y-S, Yu S-B, Xing Y-Z, Zhang Q-F (2011) A major QTL, Ghd8, plays pleiotropic roles in regulating grain productivity, plant height, and heading date in rice. Mol Plant 4(2):319–330. https://doi.org/10.1093/mp/ssq070
Yang Z (2007) PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol 24(8):1586–1591. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msm088
Yano M, Katayose Y, Ashikari M, Yamanouchi U, Monna L, Fuse T, Baba T, Yamamoto K, Umehara Y, Nagamura Y, Sasaki T (2000) Hd1, a Major photoperiod sensitivity quantitative trait locus in rice, is closely related to the arabidopsis flowering time gene CONSTANS. Plant Cell 12(12):2473–2483. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.12.12.2473
Zhang JX, Wu KL, Tian LN, Zeng SJ, Duan J (2011) Cloning and characterization of a novel CONSTANS-like gene from Phalaenopsis hybrida. Acta Physiol Plant 33(2):409–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-010-0560-4
Zhu Y, Klasfeld S, Jeong CW, Jin R, Goto K, Yamaguchi N, Wagner D (2020) TERMINAL FLOWER 1-FD complex target genes and competition with FLOWERING LOCUS T. Nat Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18782-1
Acknowledgements
We thank Markus Günther from the Technische Universität Dresden for technical assistance at the SEM facilities. This research was funded by Estrategia de Sostenibilidad 2018–2019 from Universidad de Antioquia, the Convocatoria COLCIENCIAS 808-2018 (código 110180863819 CT 192-2019), the Convocatoria Programáticas 2017-16302, the 2019 BSA Graduate Student Research Award from the Botanical Society of America, the 2022 Kaplan Award in Comparative Morphology from the Botanical Society of America and the 2022 L'Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science Award.
Funding
Open Access funding provided by Colombia Consortium.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
Additional information
Communicated by Gabriela Pagnussat.
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.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Madrigal, Y., Alzate, J.F. & Pabón-Mora, N. Evolution of major flowering pathway integrators in Orchidaceae. Plant Reprod 37, 85–109 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00497-023-00482-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00497-023-00482-7