The degradation of HFR1, a putative bHLH class transcription factor involved in light signaling, is regulated by phosphorylation and requires COP1.

All developmental transitions throughout the life cycle of a plant are influenced by light. In Arabidopsis, multiple photoreceptors including the UV-A/blue-sensing cryptochromes (cry1-2) and the red/far-red responsive phytochromes (phyA-E) monitor the ambient light conditions. Light-regulated protein stability is a major control point of photomorphogenesis. The ubiquitin E3 ligase COP1 (constitutively photomorphogenic 1) regulates the stability of several light-signaling components. HFR1 (long hypocotyl in far-red light) is a putative transcription factor with a bHLH domain acting downstream of both phyA and the cryptochromes. HFR1 is closely related to PIF1, PIF3, and PIF4 (phytochrome interacting factor 1, 3 and 4), but in contrast to the latter three, there is no evidence for a direct interaction between HFR1 and the phytochromes. Here, we show that the protein abundance of HFR1 is tightly controlled by light. HFR1 is an unstable phosphoprotein, particularly in the dark. The proteasome and COP1 are required in vivo to degrade phosphorylated HFR1. In addition, HFR1 can interact with COP1, consistent with the idea of COP1 directly mediating HFR1 degradation. We identify a domain, conserved among several bHLH class proteins involved in light signaling , as a determinant of HFR1 stability. Our physiological experiments indicate that the control of HFR1 protein abundance is important for a normal de-etiolation response.

Light-regulated plant growth and development.

Plants are sessile and photo-autotrophic; their entire life cycle is thus strongly influenced by the ever-changing light environment. In order to sense and respond to those fluctuating conditions higher plants possess several families of photoreceptors that can monitor light from UV-B to the near infrared (far-red). The molecular nature of UV-B sensors remains unknown, red (R) and far-red (FR) light is sensed by the phytochromes (phyA-phyE in Arabidopsis) while three classes of UV-A/blue photoreceptors have been identified: cryptochromes, phototropins, and members of the Zeitlupe family (cry1, cry2, phot1, phot2, ZTL, FKF1, and LKP2 in Arabidopsis). Functional specialization within photoreceptor families gave rise to members optimized for a wide range of light intensities. Genetic and photobiological studies performed in Arabidopsis have shown that these light sensors mediate numerous adaptive responses (e.g., phototropism and shade avoidance) and developmental transitions (e.g., germination and flowering). Some physiological responses are specifically triggered by a single photoreceptor but in many cases multiple light sensors ensure a coordinated response. Recent studies also provide examples of crosstalk between the responses of Arabidopsis to different external factors, in particular among light, temperature, and pathogens. Although the different photoreceptors are unrelated in structure, in many cases they trigger similar signaling mechanisms including light-regulated protein-protein interactions or light-regulated stability of several transcription factors. The breath and complexity of this topic forced us to concentrate on specific aspects of photomorphogenesis and we point the readers to recent reviews for some aspects of light-mediated signaling (e.g., transition to flowering).

Let there be light in the nucleus!

Ambient light conditions trigger both developmental transitions, such as the induction of flowering, and a suite of adaptive responses, exemplified by the shade-avoidance syndrome. These responses are initiated by three families of photoreceptors that are conserved in all higher plants: the phototropins, cryptochromes and phytochromes (phyA--phyE, cry1--cry3, phot1 and phot2 in Arabidopsis). Molecular genetic studies performed mainly in Arabidopsis indicate that photon capture by these light sensors usually initiates rapid changes in the gene expression profile, leading to plant adaptation to their environment. Interestingly, numerous transcription factors are early targets of light regulation, both at the transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels.

Phytochrome Kinase Substrate 4 is phosphorylated by the phototropin 1 photoreceptor.

Phototropism allows plants to redirect their growth towards the light to optimize photosynthesis under reduced light conditions. Phototropin 1 (phot1) is the primary low blue light-sensing receptor triggering phototropism in Arabidopsis. Light-induced autophosphorylation of phot1, an AGC-class protein kinase, constitutes an essential step for phototropism. However, apart from the receptor itself, substrates of phot1 kinase activity are less clearly established. Phototropism is also influenced by the cryptochromes and phytochromes photoreceptors that do not provide directional information but influence the process through incompletely characterized mechanisms. Here, we show that Phytochrome Kinase Substrate 4 (PKS4), a known element of phot1 signalling, is a substrate of phot1 kinase activity in vitro that is phosphorylated in a phot1-dependent manner in vivo. PKS4 phosphorylation is transient and regulated by a type 2-protein phosphatase. Moreover, phytochromes repress the accumulation of the light-induced phosphorylated form of PKS4 showing a convergence of photoreceptor activity on this signalling element. Our physiological analyses suggest that PKS4 phosphorylation is not essential for phototropism but is part of a negative feedback mechanism.

Phototropism: at the crossroads of light-signaling pathways.

Phototropism enables plants to orient growth towards the direction of light and thereby maximizes photosynthesis in low-light environments. In angiosperms, blue-light photoreceptors called phototropins are primarily involved in sensing the direction of light. Phytochromes and cryptochromes (sensing red/far-red and blue light, respectively) also modulate asymmetric hypocotyl growth, leading to phototropism. Interactions between different light-signaling pathways regulating phototropism occur in cryptogams and angiosperms. In this review, we focus on the molecular mechanisms underlying the co-action between photosensory systems in the regulation of hypocotyl phototropism in Arabidopsis thaliana. Recent studies have shown that phytochromes and cryptochromes enhance phototropism by controlling the expression of important regulators of phototropin signaling. In addition, phytochromes may also regulate growth towards light via direct interaction with the phototropins.

Light-regulated interactions with SPA proteins underlie cryptochrome-mediated gene expression.

Cryptochromes are a class of photosensory receptors that control important processes in animals and plants primarily by regulating gene expression. How photon absorption by cryptochromes leads to changes in gene expression has remained largely elusive. Three recent studies, including Lian and colleagues (pp. 1023-1028) and Liu and colleagues (pp. 1029-1034) in this issue of Genes & Development, demonstrate that the interaction of light-activated Arabidopsis cryptochromes with a class of regulatory components of E3 ubiquitin ligase complexes leads to environmentally controlled abundance of transcriptional regulators.

Higher plants use LOV to perceive blue light.

Higher plants use several classes of blue light receptors to modulate a wide variety of physiological responses. Among them, both the phototropins and members of the Zeitlupe (ZTL) family use light oxygen voltage (LOV) photosensory domains. In Arabidopsis, these families comprise phot1, phot2 and ZTL, LOV Kelch Protein 2 (LKP2), and Flavin-binding Kelch F-box1 (FKF1). It has now been convincingly shown that blue-light-induced autophosphorylation of the phot1 kinase domain is an essential step in signal transduction. Recent experiments also shed light on the partially distinct photosensory specificities of phot1 and phot2. Phototropin signaling branches rapidly following photoreceptor activation to mediate distinct responses such as chloroplast movements or phototropism. Light activation of the LOV domain in ZTL family members modulates their capacity to interact with GIGANTEA (GI) and their ubiquitin E3 ligase activity. A complex between GI and FKF1 is required to trigger the degradation of a repressor of CO (CONSTANS) expression and thus modulates flowering time. In contrast, light-regulated complex formation between ZTL and GI appears to limit the capacity of ZTL to degrade its targets, which are part of the circadian oscillator.

Shadow on the Plant: A Strategy to Exit.

The light spectrum perceived by plants is affected by crowding, which results in the shade avoidance syndrome (SAS). Findings presented by Pedmale et al. bring cryptochromes to the forefront of SAS and elucidate a fascinating molecular crosstalk between photoreceptor systems operating in different wavebands.

The circadian clock controls the expression pattern of the circadian input photoreceptor, phytochrome B

Developmental and physiological responses are regulated by light throughout the entire life cycle of higher plants. To sense changes in the light environment, plants have developed various photoreceptors, including the red/far-red light-absorbing phytochromes and blue light-absorbing cryptochromes. A wide variety of physiological responses, including most light responses, also are modulated by circadian rhythms that are generated by an endogenous oscillator, the circadian clock. To provide information on local time, circadian clocks are synchronized and entrained by environmental time cues, of which light is among the most important. Light-driven entrainment of the Arabidopsis circadian clock has been shown to be mediated by phytochrome A (phyA), phytochrome B (phyB), and cryptochromes 1 and 2, thus affirming the roles of these photoreceptors as input regulators to the plant circadian clock. Here we show that the expression of PHYB∷LUC reporter genes containing the promoter and 5′ untranslated region of the tobacco NtPHYB1 or Arabidopsis AtPHYB genes fused to the luciferase (LUC) gene exhibit robust circadian oscillations in transgenic plants. We demonstrate that the abundance of PHYB RNA retains this circadian regulation and use a PHYB∷Luc fusion protein to show that the rate of PHYB synthesis is also rhythmic. The abundance of bulk PHYB protein, however, exhibits only weak circadian rhythmicity, if any. These data suggest that photoreceptor gene expression patterns may be significant in the daily regulation of plant physiology and indicate an unexpectedly intimate relationship between the components of the input pathway and the putative circadian clock mechanism in higher plants.

Vitamin B2-based blue-light photoreceptors in the retinohypothalamic tract as the photoactive pigments for setting the circadian clock in mammals

In mammals the retina contains photoactive molecules responsible for both vision and circadian photoresponse systems. Opsins, which are located in rods and cones, are the pigments for vision but it is not known whether they play a role in circadian regulation. A subset of retinal ganglion cells with direct projections to the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) are at the origin of the retinohypothalamic tract that transmits the light signal to the master circadian clock in the SCN. However, the ganglion cells are not known to contain rhodopsin or other opsins that may function as photoreceptors. We have found that the two blue-light photoreceptors, cryptochromes 1 and 2 (CRY1 and CRY2), recently discovered in mammals are specifically expressed in the ganglion cell and inner nuclear layers of the mouse retina. In addition, CRY1 is expressed at high level in the SCN and oscillates in this tissue in a circadian manner. These data, in conjunction with the established role of CRY2 in photoperiodism in plants, lead us to propose that mammals have a vitamin A-based photopigment (opsin) for vision and a vitamin B2-based pigment (cryptochrome) for entrainment of the circadian clock.

UV-A radiation effects on higher plants: exploring the known unknown

Ultraviolet-A radiation (UV-A: 315–400 nm) is a component of solar radiation that exerts a wide range of physiological responses in plants. Currently, field attenuation experiments are the most reliable source of information on the effects of UV-A. Common plant responses to UV-A include both inhibitory and stimulatory effects on biomass accumulation and morphology. UV-A effects on biomass accumulation can differ from those on root: shoot ratio, and distinct responses are described for different leaf tissues. Inhibitory and enhancing effects of UV-A on photosynthesis are also analysed, as well as activation of photoprotective responses, including UV-absorbing pigments. UV-A-induced leaf flavonoids are highly compound-specific and species-dependent. Many of the effects on growth and development exerted by UV-A are distinct to those triggered by UV-B and vary considerably in terms of the direction the response takes. Such differences may reflect diverse UV-perception mechanisms with multiple photoreceptors operating in the UV-A range and/or variations in the experimental approaches used. This review highlights a role that various photoreceptors (UVR8, phototropins, phytochromes and cryptochromes) may play in plant responses to UV-A when dose, wavelength and other conditions are taken into account.

Effects of dark or of red, blue or white light on germination of subterranean clover seeds

Dry or imbibed seeds of the negatively photoblastic burr burying subterranean clover cv. ‘Seaton Park’ were treated with dark or with red, blue or white light to evaluate the effects of light on seed germination. Dry seeds treated with constant white light, red light or blue light during 8 days and subsequently incubated in dark had final germination and duration of germination reduced, and the distribution of germination changed from highly asymmetric to symmetric respectively. Imbibing seeds incubated under constant blue or white light had final germination strongly reduced seven days after sowing (7.3% and 50.1% of the germination under dark) with significant differences between them. After transferral to dark, true complete recovery of germination of seeds treated with white light was observed 19 days after sowing, but only partial recovery in seeds treated with blue light. Results of dry and imbibed seeds are consistent with no activity of phytochromes, as expected in negatively photoblastic seeds. Results of dry seeds are seemingly contradictory because total germination data imply the inactivity of red and blue light photoreceptors, the opposite being implied by duration and shape of germination. A tentative hypothetical solution for the contradiction is presented. Results of imbibed seeds are fully consistent with cryptochromes but not with phototropins mediation of responses to light of seed germination in ‘Seaton Park’. The ecological and adaptive significance of such responses are discussed in the framework of light attenuation in soil and the requirement and ability of subterranean clover ‘Seaton Park’ to bury seeds.