Ced by its interaction with GhCML11 inside a Ca2+-dependent manner in vitro. The EMSA was conducted to determine the Ca2+ binding home of GhCML11. It can be identified that CaMs undergo conformational modifications and exhibit an LY-404187 Purity & Documentation increase in their electrophoretic migration rates immediately after binding Ca2+ (Garrigos et al., 1991; Wang et al., 2015). As shown in Supplementary Fig. S6, the mobility of GhCML11 was improved in the presence of Ca2+, demonstrating that GhCML11 is really a functional Ca2+binding protein. We subsequent conducted an in vivo test to determine when the effect of GhCML11 on GhMYB108 DNA binding activity reflectsits part in the TF activity of GhMYB108. As it was reported that a plant MYB could bind to the promoter sequence of PR5 (thaumatin-like protein) and regulate its transcription (Kenton et al., 2000; Z. Zhang et al., 2012), we performed a transient expression assay by using the promoter sequence of a cotton PR5 gene to drive the expression on the reporter gene with or devoid of the presence of GhCML11 (Fig. 7BD). Initially, the binding of GhMYB108 towards the GhPR5 promoter was tested by EMSA. As shown in Supplementary Fig. S7C, GhMYB108 bound for the GhPR5 promoter effectively. The GhPR5 promoter was then fused to the Luc reporter gene (GhPR5pro:Luc) and infiltrated into N. benthamiana leaves. Two days later, the expression of GhMYB108 and GhCML11 was confirmed by qRT-PCR (Fig. 7B) and Luc expression was examined. The results showed that the GhPR5 promoter drove Luc expression weakly on its own, but co-expression of GhPR5Pro:Luc with GhMYB108 created an apparent enhance in Luc activity, indicating that GhMYB108 activated the expression of Luc driven by the PR5 promoter. Luc activity was also enhanced when 35S:GhCML11 was co-transformed with GhPR5Pro:Luc, possibly brought on by endogenous GhMYB108 homolog(s) in N. benthamiana, which could possibly act co-operatively with GhCML11 and promote the GhPR5 promoter activity. Co-expression in the GhPR5Pro:Luc reporter with GhMYB108 and GhCML11 led to a great deal stronger Luc intensity than in the cells injectedMYB108 interacts with CML11 in defense response |Fig. 5. Interaction of GhMYB108 and GhCML11 proteins. (A) Yeast two-hybrid assay to detect interaction in between GhMYB108 and GhCML11. The yeast strain containing the indicated plasmids was grown on SD eu rp DO (DDO) plates and SD eu rp de is DO (QDO) plates (containing five mM 3-AT) for 3 d. Interaction of GhMYB108 with all the AD domain inside the pGADT7 empty vector was utilized as a unfavorable manage. (B) Pulldown assay. GST hCML11 fusion protein was used as bait, and MBP hMYB108 fusion protein was utilised as prey. Alternatively, MBP hMYB108 fusion protein was used as bait, and GST hCML11 fusion protein was utilised as prey. The anti-MBP and anti-GST antibodies have been employed to detect bait and prey proteins. MBP and GST proteins have been utilized as negative controls. (C) LCI analysis of the interaction among GhMYB108 and GhCML11. Agrobacterium strains containing the indicated pairs were co-expressed in N. benthamiana. The luminescent signal was collected at 48 h right after infiltration. (D) Quantification of relevant Luc activities in (C). Error bars represent the SD of 3 biological replicates. Asterisks indicate statistically substantial variations, as determined by Student’s t-test (P0.01). (This figure is available in colour at JXB on-line.)Fig. 6. Subcellular localization of GhCML11 proteins. (A) Co-localization of GhMYB108 and GhCML11 within the nucleus. Agrobacterium strains containing the indicated pair of GhMYB1.
