EMBO/SourceData huggingface dataset:
Figure 2Luciferase sequestration as an assay for in vitro uptake. (A) Luciferase cofractionating with vacuoles is proteinase K protected. In vitro uptake reactions of three times the standard volume were performed (60 min, 27°C) in the presence or absence of the ATP-regenerating system. The vacuoles were reisolated, washed, resuspended in 150 mM KCl in PS buffer to a concentration of 0.23 mg/ml, and split into aliquots. After addition of 1% Triton X-100 or buffer, the mixture was digested with the indicated concentrations of proteinase K (15 min, 0°C). Proteinase treatment was stopped by adding one volume of 0.5 mM PMSF in 150 mM KCl in PS buffer. Then, luciferase activity was assayed.(B) Luciferase can be released from the vacuolar lumen by freeze-thaw treatment. An uptake reaction was performed (60 min, 27°C). The vacuoles were reisolated and washed as described in the Materials and Methods section. The final pellet was resuspended in 90 μl PS buffer with 150 mM KCl and split into two aliquots. One was frozen at −80°C and thawed again slowly, whereas the other remained on ice. The samples were centrifuged (15 min, 145,000 g, 4°C). The supernatants (Sup)were recovered and the pellets were resuspended in an equal volume of PS with 150 mM KCl. Luciferase activity in both fractions was determined. The reaction tubes for this experiment had been coated with BSA (0.5 mg/ml, 15 min at room temperature) to reduce unspecific binding of luciferase to the surface.
Figure 3time course and temperature dependence of uptake. (A) Standard uptake reactions were performed in the presence or absence of the ATP-regenerating system. After the indicated times at 27°C, the vacuoles were reisolated, washed, treated with protease, and luciferaseuptake activity was assayed.(B) A standard uptake reaction was performed. After 70 min of incubation, the vacuoles were reisolated, washed, and treated with protease. The vacuoles were reisolated again, resuspended in reaction buffer without luciferase, and incubated for the indicated times at 27°C. Aliquots were withdrawn to assay the total luciferase remaining. As a control, luciferase was incubated in reaction buffer for the same periods of time and assayed for activity.
Figure 4Requirements for in vitro uptake. Standard uptake reactions were performed (60 min) (A) at different temperatures, or in the presence of different concentrations of (B) cytosol, (C) ATP, or (D) MgCl2. Luciferase uptake was determined as described in the legend to Fig. 3 A. In B, titration curves for four independent cytosol preparations are shown. The maximal uptake signal of each titration curve was set at 100%. In D, the sample drawn as 0 mM MgCl2 contained 10 mM EDTA to chelate free magnesium in the reaction.
Figure 6In vitro uptake is independent of components involved in homotypic vacuolar fusion. (A) Standard uptake reactions were performed (60 min, 27°C) in the presence of the indicated reagents using a mixture of vacuoles from strains DBY5734-16 (Δpep4) and DBY5734-19 (Δpho8). Therefore, homotypic vacuolar fusion and luciferase uptake could be assayed simultaneously from the same sample. Four independent experiments were averaged. Error bars indicate SD. For averaging, uptake and fusion activities of the control sample without inhibitor were set at 100%. Inhibitors were used at the following concentrations: anti-Sec17p, 1 μM; anti-Sec18p, 1 μM; Gdi1p, 2.5 μM; anti-Vam3p, 1 μM; anti-Vam7p, 1 μM; and anti-Nyv1p, 1 μM.(B) Vacuoles and cytosols were prepared from sec18-1 and from corresponding wild-type (Wt) cells grown and spheroplasted at 23°C. The isolated vacuoles and the cytosols were exposed to heat treatment (10 min, 37°C). Standard uptake reactions were performed with vacuoles and cytosols in the indicated combinations. Control reactions were performed in the absence of ATP. Five independent experiments were averaged; the sample with vacuoles and cytosol from wild-type cells was used as the 100% reference. Error bars indicate SD. Mut, mutant.
Figure 7In vitro uptake depends on GTP hydrolysis and on the V-ATPase. (A) Standard uptake reactions were performed in the presence of different concentrations of GTPγS. Luciferase uptake was assayed as in the legend to Fig. 3 A. Four independent experiments were averaged, using the sample without inhibitor as the 100% reference. Error bars indicate SD. GTPγS did not influence luciferase activity by itself (not shown).(B) Standard uptake reactions were performed in the presence of FCCP (CMA, 20 μM) or concanamycin A (20 μM), or in the absence of ATP.
Figure 1(H) The bur1-ΔC mutant exhibits a synthetic growth defect with the vac17Δ mutant. Plasmids were transformed into a bur1Δ or bur1Δ vac17Δ mutant containing YCp50 [URA3] BUR1. Plasmids tested were pRS415 [LEU2] (mock), pRS415 BUR1, or pRS415 bur1-ΔC. Transformed colonies were cultured in liquid medium and serial dilutions spotted onto SC+5-FOA or SC-Leu-Ura plates. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 3 days.
Figure 2(A, B) The bur1-ΔC vac17Δ double mutant exhibits a delay in progression through G1 phase of the cell cycle. Yeast were grown in YPD medium and collected in log phase growth. DNA content was measured using propidium iodide (PI) staining and assessed by flow cytometry. p-value determined with a one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc test. ** (p-value < 1 x 10-2). Error bars; SD calculated from at least four independent experiments with at least 100 cells counted in each strain/experiment. (C, D) A bur1-267 mutant also exhibits a delay in progression through G1 phase of the cell cycle. DNA content was measured using PI staining and assessed by flow cytometry. p-value determined with a one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc test. **** (p-value < 1 x 10-4). Error bars; SD calculated from at least four independent experiments with at least 100 cells counted in each strain/experiment.(E, F) The bur1-ΔC vac17Δ double mutant shows accumulation of Whi5 in the nucleus. WT, vac17Δ, bur1-ΔC, and bur1-ΔC vac17Δ cells, which express Whi5-3xGFP and Nup188-mCherry from endogenous loci, were incubated at 24 ̊C. Cells were scored for the presence of Whi5-3xGFP in within the nucleus (Nup188-mCherry). Error bars; SD calculated from at least four independent experiments with at least 100 cells counted in each strain/experiment. p-value determined with a one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc test. ** (p-value < 1 x 10-2). Error bars; SD calculated from at least four independent experiments with at least 100 cells counted in each strain/experiment. Scale bar, 2 μm.
Figure 3(B) The bur1-∆C vac17∆ double mutant cells have the ability to generate a vacuole de novo, which suggests that the cell-cycle delay is due to a defect in Bur1-dependent signaling. WT, vac17Δ, bur1-∆C, and bur1-∆C vac17∆ cells which express Vph1-GFP from its endogenous locus, were pulse labeled with the vacuole specific dye FM4-64. WT and bur1-∆C cells have both FM4-64 and Vph1-GFP signals in both mother and daughter cells. vac17Δ and bur1-∆C vac17∆ cells have both Vph1-GFP and FM4-64 on the vacuole in mother cells, however the daughter cells solely have a Vph1-GFP labeled vacuole, indicating that the vacuole was generated de novo, rather than inherited from the mother vacuole. Arrowheads; new vacuoles in daughter cells. Scale bar, 2 μm.
Figure 4(A) In vivo phosphorylation of Sch9 is reduced in bur1-∆C vac17∆ cells. WT, bur1-∆C, vac17∆, or bur1-∆C vac17∆ cells expressing SCH9-HA from the URA3 locus were grown in YPD. Cell lysates were analyzed by immunoblot with antibodies directed against HA (top) and Pgk1 (loading control). (B) In vivo phosphorylation of Sch9 is reduced in bur1-267 cells. WT, vac17∆, bur1-267, or bur1-267 vac17∆ cells expressing SCH9-HA from the URA3 locus were grown in YPD. Cell lysates were analyzed by immunoblot with antibodies directed against HA (top) and Pgk1 (loading control).(C) bur1-∆C shows high rapamycin sensitivity. WT, tor1∆, bur1-∆C, tor1∆ bur1-∆C or vac17∆ cells were cultured in liquid YPD medium and serial dilutions were spotted onto YPD plates with 0, 2, 4 or 8 ng/ml of rapamycin added. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 2 days.
Figure 5(B) In vitro, Bur1 directly phosphorylates the kinase domain of Sch9 as well as Bur1 itself. pRS425 BUR1-HA and pVT102-Ura BUR2, the essential cyclin for BUR1, were co-expressed in a bur1Δ mutant, immunoprecipitated using anti-HA antibody and protein A beads, and then incubated with [γ-32P]ATP and GST, GST-N-Sch9 (1-390) or GST-C-Sch9 (391-824). Proteins were eluted with SDS sample buffer, separated by SDS-PAGE, and transferred to nitrocellulose membranes. Membranes exposed to x-ray film (top) or stained with Ponceau S (bottom). Red arrowhead; phosphorylated GST-C-Sch9. Gray arrowhead; auto-phosphorylated Bur1.(D) Sch9-2D3E, but not Sch9-3A-2D3E, partially suppressed the rapamycin sensitivity of tor1∆ cells. tor1∆ which expresses pRS426 (mock), pRS425 TOR1, pVT102-Ura (mock), pVT102-Ura Sch9, pVT102-Ura Sch9-2D3E, or pVT102-Ura Sch9-3A-2D3E, were cultured in liquid SC-Ura medium and serial dilutions spotted onto SC-Ura plates with 0 or 8 ng/ml of rapamycin added. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 2-3 days.(E) The Sch9-2D3E mutant did not suppress the rapamycin sensitivity of bur1-∆C cells. bur1-∆C which expresses pRS426 (mock), pRS426 BUR1, pVT102-Ura (mock), pVT102-Ura SCH9, pVT102-Ura sch9-2D3E, pVT102-Ura sch9-3A-2D3E, pVT102-Ura sch9-3D/E, or pVT102-Ura sch9-3D/E-2D3E were cultured in liquid SC-Ura medium and serial dilutions spotted onto SC-Ura plates with 0 or 8 ng/ml of rapamycin added. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 3 days.
Figure 6(A) Bur1 fused SV40-NLS does not rescue the rapamycin sensitivity of bur1-∆C compared to Bur1 without the NLS. bur1-∆C which expresses pRS416 (mock), pRS416 BUR1, pRS416 BUR1-mNG, pRS416 BUR1-mNG-NLS, pRS416 bur1-∆C, pRS416 bur1-∆C-mNG-NLS or pRS416 bur1-∆N, were cultured in liquid SC-Ura medium and serial dilutions spotted onto SC-Ura plates with 0, 4, 8, or 16 ng/ml of rapamycin added. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 2 days.(B) Adding nuclear-export signal (NES) of PKI to Bur1 and/or deletion of the importin α-dependent NLS from Bur1 resulted in higher sensitivity to rapamycin compared to Bur1 without this NES. bur1-∆C which expresses pRS426 (mock), pRS426 BUR1, pRS426 bur1-∆N, pRS426 BUR1-mNG, pRS426 BUR1-mNG-NES, or pRS426 bur1-∆N-mNG-NES, were cultured in liquid SC-Ura medium and serial dilutions spotted onto SC-Ura plates with 0, 4, 8, or 16 ng/ml of rapamycin added. Plates were incubated at 24 ̊C for 2 days.
Figure 1C, Immunoblot analysis of protein lysates from MEF cells treated with EBSS, 250 nM Torin-1 or 100 μM NaAsO2 for 1h and run under non-reducing conditions. For refeed condition, starved cells were incubated in complete medium for the indicated times.
Figure 2C, Immunoblot analysis of protein lysates from ARPE-19 cells expressing TFEB-FLAG-WT or mutants treated with 250 μM NaAsO2 or EBSS for 1h and run under non-reducing condition.
Figure 3D, Immunoblot analysis of protein lysates from ARPE-19 cells overexpressing TFEB-FLAG or TFE3-MYC, treated with 250 nM Torin-1 for 1 h and run under non-reducing condition. E, Quantification of immunoblot data shown in (D). Data are presented as mean ± SD using two-tailed t-test (*)p<0.05 from three independent experiments.
Figure 4D, Relative quantitative RT-PCR analysis of the mRNA expression of autophagy- (UVRAG), mitochondria- (PGC-1α) and lysosome (MCOLN1, ATPV1C1 and HEXA)-related genes in ARPE-19 cells overexpressing TFEB-FLAG-WT or TFEB-FLAG-C212A. Data are presented as mean ± SD using two-way ANOVA, (ns) not significant as compared to the same gene in TFEB-WT overexpressing cells, from three independent experiments.
Figure 5G, Relative quantitative RT-PCR analysis of the mRNA expression of lysosome-related genes (MCOLN1 and ATPV61C1) in ARPE-19 and HeLa cells treated with 100 μM and 50 μM NaAsO2 respectively for the indicated times. Data are presented as mean ± SD using one-way ANOVA (*)p<0.05, (**)p< 0.01, (***)p<0.001 from two independent experiments.
Figure 6D, Relative quantitative RT-PCR analysis of the mRNA expression of autophagy- (UVRAG), lysosome- (ATP6V1C1), oxidative stress response- (TXNRD1 and HMOX1), cell cycle control- (CDKN1a) and cytokine production (IL6) -related genes in TFEB/TFE3-double knockout MEFs cells stably expressing TFEB-FLAG-WT or TFEB-FLAG-C212A and treated with 5 μM arsenic trioxide (ATO) or 12.5 μM NaAsO2 for 12 h. Data are presented as mean ± SD using two-way ANOVA (*)p<0.05, (**)p<0.01, (***)p<0.001, and (****)p<0.0001 from three independent experiments.
Figure 7C, Representative examples of HLH-30::3xFLAG::eGFP subcellular localization: Cytoplasmic, diffuse GFP distribution along the whole body of the worm; Weak nuclear, some cells in the posterior part of the worm display nuclear GFP labeling but no nuclear labeling is found in the head cells; Strong nuclear, distinct nuclear GFP labeling in cells along the worm body, including neurons in the head area. Arrowheads denote nuclear localization of HLH-30::3xFLAG::eGFP. Scale bar 200 µm and 50 µm. D, Quantification of the subcellular distribution of HLH-30::3xFLAG::eGFP and HLH-30(C284A)::3xFLAG::eGFP upon treatment with different stimuli. Data are from three independent experiments with at least 50 animals per experiment.
Figure 8A, Lifespan assay of hlh-30 mutants at 25°C. Graph represents Kaplan-Meier survival plots of two independent experiments initiated with 100 animals per strain. (**)p<0.01 and (****)p<0.0001 by Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test compared to wild type control. B, Survival of hlh-30 mutants on 7.5 mM NaAsO2. Data are the mean ± SD of three independent experiments initiated with 120 animals per strain. (****)p<0.0001 by two-way ANOVA compared to wild type control. C, Survival of hlh-30 mutants to infection by Staphylococcus aureus. Data are the mean ± SD of three independent experiments initiated with 100 animals per strain. (****)p<0.0001 by two-way ANOVA compared to wild type control. E, Synthetic developmental delay phenotype of eat-2(ad1116) worms carrying mutations in the hlh-30 gene. Data are the mean ± SD of three independent experiments with at least 20 animals per assay. (****)p<0.0001 by One-way ANOVA with multiple comparison test. F, Representative images of worms quantified in (E). Scale bars 200 µm.
Figure 2ISCts midguts expressing YFP alone (control), or expressing two non-overlapping EcR-RNAi, and quantification of the number of YFP-positive cells (yellow). The graph also plots the number of GFP-positive cells in esgts midgut expressing GFP alone (ctrl), or expressing EcR-RNAi#1, EcR-RNAi#2, and mcherry-RNAi as an additional negative control (see EV2B).esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing EcR-DN, and EcR-DN + pri. Samples were stained for GFP (green). The graph shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells in the different genotypes.Posterior midguts containing control and Ubr3 null MARCM clones (GFP, green).esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing Ubr3-RNAi, and Ubr3-RNAi + OvoB. Samples were stained for GFP (green). H' quantification of GFP-positive cells from H.
Figure 3esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control) or expressing SvbACT. Samples were stained for GFP (green), and ß-catenin (purple), DE-Cadherin (white) or Scribble (yellow). Top and bottom pictures show separate channels for a same region.esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing miR8, OvoB, and mir8 + OvoB. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and ß-catenin (purple). The graph shows quantification of GFP-positive cells for each genotype. The Y axis is drawn using a log(10) scale.esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing Notch Intra Cellular Domain (NICD), and NICD + OvoB. In closeups (right), DAPI is shown in purple for improved contrast; the arrow highlights a cell with intermediate phenotype.
Figure 4esgtsF/O midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing RasV12, and RasV12 + svb-RNAi (top panels). Bottom panels show esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing EGFR-DN, and EGFR-DN + OvoB. Samples were stained for GFP (green). The graph shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells in esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (ctrl), or expressing EGFR-DN, EGFR-DN + OvoB, and EGFR-DN + svb-RNAi. The Y axis is plotted as log(10).esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing ArmS10, ArmS10 + svb-RNAi, ArmS10 + OvoB ,TCF-DN, and TCF-DN + OvoB. Samples were stained for GFP (green). The graph shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells in esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (ctrl), or expressing TCF-DN, TCF-DN + OvoB, and TCF-DN + svb-RNAi. The Y axis is plotted as log(10).
Figure 5esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing SvbREP. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and Prospero (red). Closeups correspond to boxed regions, with DAPI shown in purple and GFP-positive cells outlined in yellow.esgts-F/O midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing SvbREP. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and cleaved DCP1 (red). E' shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells in esgts guts expressing GFP alone (ctrl), or DIAP, SvbREP, and SvbREP + DIAP.
Figure 6esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing Notch-RNAi, Notch-RNAi + svb-RNAi, and Notch-RNAi + SvbREP. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and Prospero (red). The graph shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells.esgts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing STAT-RNAi, STAT-RNAi + svb-RNAi and STAT-RNAi + SvbREP. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and Prospero (red). The graph shows quantification of the number of GFP-positive cells.
Figure 7Cross sections of control MyoIAts midguts (expressing GFP and mCherry-RNAi), or expressing svb-RNAi, SvbACT, and Pri. Samples were stained for F-actin (white), GFP (green) and Tsp2a (yellow).
Figure 8MyoIAts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing SvbACT. Samples were stained for GFP (green), Scribble (yellow), ß-catenin (purple) and DAPI (Blue). A' pictures display cross sections of the regions shown in A.MyoIAts midguts expressing GFP alone (control), or expressing SvbACT. Samples were stained for GFP (green) and PH3 (red). The graph plots number of mitotic PH3-positive cells per midgut of MyoIAts guts expressing GFP alone (ctrl), or expressing SvbACT , and SvbREP + pri.
Figure 1A. qPCR analysis shows loss of Setd1b in forebrain regions while levels in the cerebellum are not affected (CA: Control, n = 6; cKO, n = 6. DG: Control, n = 6; cKO, n = 6. Cortex: Control, n = 7; cKO, n = 7. Cerebellum: Control, n = 4; cKO, n = 4). * p-value < 0.05 (Student t-test).B. Immunoblot analysis shows loss of Setd1b protein in the hippocampus of Setd1b cKO mice (Control, n = 4; cKO, n = 4). ** p-value < 0.01 (Student t-test).C. Immunohistochemical staining (upper level) for marker proteins of neuronal integrity and quantification (lower panel) show no difference in control and Setd1b cKO mice (NeuN: Control, n = 6; cKO, n = 6; Student t-test p-value = 0.57. MAP2: Control, n = 4; cKO, n = 4; Student t-test p-value = 0.72. Iba1: Control, n = 5; cKO, n = 5; Student t-test p-value = 0.8. Gfap: Control, n = 5; cKO, n = 5; Student t-test p-value = 0.09.). Scale bar: 100 µm.D. Average speed (left panel) and percent time spent in the center (right panel) during exposure to the open field test was similar in control and Setd1b cKO mice (Average speed: Control, n = 15; cKO, n = 15; Student t-test p-value = 0.075. Time spent in center: Control, n = 15; cKO, n = 15; Student t-test p-value = 0.96).E. Short term memory was not different between control and Setd1b cKO mice as indicated by similar percent of alternations in the Y-maze test (Control, n = 15; cKO, n = 15; Student t-test p-value = 0.3).F. Depressive-like behavior was measured in the Porsolt forced swim test. There was no significant difference in the % time spent immobile between groups (Control, n = 8; cKO, n = 8; Student t-test p-value = 0.5).G. Escape latency during water maze training indicated severe learning impairment in Setd1b cKO mice (Control: n = 15, cKO: n = 15. Repeated measures ANOVA, genotype effect: F (1,28) = 82.34, **** p-value < 0.0001).H. Plots showing the specific search strategies during water maze training. Note the failure of Setd1b cKO mice to adopt hippocampus-dependent search strategies. I. The cognitive score calculated on the basis of the hippocampal search strategies reflects severe memory impairment in Setd1b cKO mice (Student t-test: *** p-value < 0.001).
Figure 6F. Left panel shows representative images of RNAscope performed for Kmt2a, Kmt2b and Setd1b. Right panel shows a bar chart quantifying the dots/cell (n = 1500 cells from 2 mice) indicative of the corresponding expression level. Kmt2a expression was significantly higher when compared to Kmt2b or Setd1b (*** p-value < 0,0001, Student t-test).
Figure 1(A) The transcript level of solo LTR in the wild type and the epcr1 mutant. Error bars are standard deviations of three technical replicates. The experiment was independently performed three times and similar results were obtained.(B) The developmental phenotype of the epcr1 and epcr2 single mutants and the epcr1/2 double mutant relative to the wild type. Two-week-old seedlings grown on vertical MS medium plates are shown.(C) The transcript levels of solo LTR, SDC, AtSN1, AtGP1 and AtCOPIA28 in the wild type, epcr1 and epcr2 single mutants, epcr1/2 double mutant, and two individual EPCR1 transgenic lines in the epcr1/2 double mutant background. Error bars are standard deviations of three biological replicates.
Figure 2(A) The interaction between EPCR1 and ARID2 or ARID3. Arabidopsis plants carrying EPCR1-Flag and ARID2-Myc or ARID3-Myc transgenes were used for co-IP.(B) The interaction between TRB1 and ARID2. Arabidopsis plants carrying TRB1-Flag and/or ARID2-Myc transgenes were used for co-IP.(C) The interaction between TRB1 and EPCR1. Arabidopsis plants carrying TRB1-Flag and/or EPCR1-Myc transgenes were used for co-IP.(E) The interaction between TRB1 and PWWP2 or ARID2 was detected by an GST pull-down assay.(F) The interaction between EPCR1, PWWP2, ARID2, and TRB1 was detected by an HIS pull-down assay. The full-length PWWP2, ARID2, and TRB1, and the EPCR1-N terminal (1-500 aa) were used for the interaction assay.
Figure 3(A) The developmental phenotype of the arid2/3/4 mutant as compared to the wild type. Two-week-old seedlings grown on MS medium are shown.(B) The developmental phenotype of the pwwp1/2/3+/- mutant as compared to the wild type. One-month-old plants grown in soil are shown.The effect of the arid2, arid3, and arid4 mutations on the silencing of solo LTR, SDC, and FWA as determined by qPCR. Showing are results of three biological replicates with standard deviations.The effect of the pwwp1, pwwp2, and pwwp3 mutations on the silencing of solo LTR, SDC, and FWA as determined by qPCR. Showing are results of three biological replicates with standard deviations.(E) The effect of the trb1 mutation and the TRB2 knockdown (TRB2-KD) on the silencing of solo LTR, as determined by qPCR (right panel). The transcript level of TRB2 was evaluated to confirm the TRB2 knockdown (left panel). Error bars represent standard deviations of three biological replicates.
Figure 4(B) Heat maps showing differentially transcribed genes and TEs in the arid2/3/4 and epcr1/2 mutants relative to the wild type.(D) Genome browser snapshots showing the transcript patterns of ROS1 and IBM1 in arid2/3/4 and epcr1/2 relative to the wild type.(E) Effects of arid2/3/4 epcr1/2 on the transcript levels of ROS1 and IBM1-L as determined by qPCR. The expression of ROS1 and the longer version of IBM1 (IBM1-L) was evaluated by qPCR. ACT7 was amplified as an internal control. Bars represent SD from two independent experiments, each with three technical replications.