Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Phytochrome B triggers light-dependent chromatin remodelling through the PRC2-associated PHD finger protein VIL1

Nature Plants volume 7, pages 1213–1219 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

To compensate for a sessile nature, plants have developed sophisticated mechanisms to sense varying environmental conditions. Phytochromes (phys) are light and temperature sensors that regulate downstream genes to render plants responsive to environmental stimuli1,2,3,4. Here, we show that phyB directly triggers the formation of a repressive chromatin loop by physically interacting with VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3-LIKE1/VERNALIZATION 5 (VIL1/VRN5), a component of Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2)5,6, in a light-dependent manner. VIL1 and phyB cooperatively contribute to the repression of growth-promoting genes through the enrichment of Histone H3 Lys27 trimethylation (H3K27me3), a repressive histone modification. In addition, phyB and VIL1 mediate the formation of a chromatin loop to facilitate the repression of ATHB2. Our findings show that phyB directly utilizes chromatin remodelling to regulate the expression of target genes in a light-dependent manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: VIL1 and phyB synergistically inhibit hypocotyl elongation by regulating growth-promoting genes.
Fig. 2: VIL1 preferentially interacts with the active form of phyB both in vivo and in vitro.
Fig. 3: VIL1 and phyB cooperate to remodel the chromatin of the ATHB2 locus to control its expression.
Fig. 4: VIL1 and phyB cooperatively form a repressive chromatin loop to inhibit ATHB2 expression.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data supporting the findings of this study are available in the paper and Extended Data Figs. 1–10. Additional data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request. Source data are provided with this paper.

References

  1. Bae, G. & Choi, G. Decoding of light signals by plant phytochromes and their interacting proteins. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59, 281–311 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jung, J. H. et al. Phytochromes function as thermosensors in Arabidopsis. Science 354, 886–889 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Legris, M., Ince, Y. C. & Fankhauser, C. Molecular mechanisms underlying phytochrome-controlled morphogenesis in plants. Nat. Commun. 10, 5219 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Cheng, M. C., Kathare, P. K., Paik, I. & Huq, E. Phytochrome signaling networks. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 72, 217–244 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. De Lucia, F., Crevillen, P., Jones, A. M., Greb, T. & Dean, C. A PHD–polycomb repressive complex 2 triggers the epigenetic silencing of FLC during vernalization. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 16831–16836 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Wood, C. C. et al. The Arabidopsis thaliana vernalization response requires a polycomb-like protein complex that also includes VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 14631–14636 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Casal, J. J., Luccioni, L. G., Oliverio, K. A. & Boccalandro, H. E. Light, phytochrome signalling and photomorphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2, 625–636 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gommers, C. M. M. & Monte, E. Seedling establishment: a dimmer switch-regulated process between dark and light signaling. Plant Physiol. 176, 1061–1074 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Leivar, P. & Quail, P. H. PIFs: pivotal components in a cellular signaling hub. Trends Plant Sci. 16, 19–28 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee, N. & Choi, G. Phytochrome-interacting factor from Arabidopsis to liverwort. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 35, 54–60 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Park, E. et al. Phytochrome B inhibits binding of phytochrome-interacting factors to their target promoters. Plant J. 72, 537–546 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Sung, S., Schmitz, R. J. & Amasino, R. M. A PHD finger protein involved in both the vernalization and photoperiod pathways in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev. 20, 3244–3248 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim, D. H. & Sung, S. Coordination of the vernalization response through a VIN3 and FLC gene family regulatory network in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 25, 454–469 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Aranda, S., Mas, G. & Di Croce, L. Regulation of gene transcription by Polycomb proteins. Sci. Adv. 1, e1500737 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. van Mierlo, G., Veenstra, G. J. C., Vermeulen, M. & Marks, H. The complexity of PRC2 subcomplexes. Trends Cell Biol. 29, 660–671 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. de Lucas, M. et al. Transcriptional regulation of Arabidopsis polycomb repressive complex 2 coordinates cell-type proliferation and differentiation. Plant Cell 28, 2616–2631 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jamieson, K. et al. Loss of HP1 causes depletion of H3K27me3 from facultative heterochromatin and gain of H3K27me2 at constitutive heterochromatin. Genome Res. 26, 97–107 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim, D. H. & Sung, S. Vernalization-triggered intragenic chromatin loop formation by long noncoding RNAs. Dev. Cell 40, 302–312 e304 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Lanzuolo, C., Roure, V., Dekker, J., Bantignies, F. & Orlando, V. Polycomb response elements mediate the formation of chromosome higher-order structures in the bithorax complex. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 1167–1174 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Eagen, K. P., Aiden, E. L. & Kornberg, R. D. Polycomb-mediated chromatin loops revealed by a subkilobase-resolution chromatin interaction map. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 8764–8769 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kheradmand Kia, S. et al. EZH2-dependent chromatin looping controls INK4a and INK4b, but not ARF, during human progenitor cell differentiation and cellular senescence. Epigenetics Chromatin 2, 16 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kunihiro, A. et al. Phytochrome-interacting factor 4 and 5 (PIF4 and PIF5) activate the homeobox ATHB2 and auxin-inducible IAA29 genes in the coincidence mechanism underlying photoperiodic control of plant growth of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol. 52, 1315–1329 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Choi, H. & Oh, E. PIF4 integrates multiple environmental and hormonal signals for plant growth regulation in Arabidopsis. Mol. Cells 39, 587–593 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Bernardo-Garcia, S. et al. BR-dependent phosphorylation modulates PIF4 transcriptional activity and shapes diurnal hypocotyl growth. Genes Dev. 28, 1681–1694 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Hornitschek, P. et al. Phytochrome interacting factors 4 and 5 control seedling growth in changing light conditions by directly controlling auxin signaling. Plant J. 71, 699–711 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nieto, C., Lopez-Salmeron, V., Daviere, J. M. & Prat, S. ELF3–PIF4 interaction regulates plant growth independently of the Evening Complex. Curr. Biol. 25, 187–193 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sun, J., Qi, L., Li, Y., Chu, J. & Li, C. PIF4-mediated activation of YUCCA8 expression integrates temperature into the auxin pathway in regulating Arabidopsis hypocotyl growth. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002594 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Oh, E., Zhu, J. Y. & Wang, Z. Y. Interaction between BZR1 and PIF4 integrates brassinosteroid and environmental responses. Nat. Cell Biol. 14, 802–809 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Xi, Y., Park, S. R., Kim, D. H., Kim, E. D. & Sung, S. Transcriptome and epigenome analyses of vernalization in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J. 103, 1490–1502 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Shu, J. et al. Genome-wide occupancy of histone H3K27 methyltransferases CURLY LEAF and SWINGER in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant Direct 3, e00100 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Jeong, J. & Choi, G. Phytochrome-interacting factors have both shared and distinct biological roles. Mol. Cells 35, 371–380 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang, Y. et al. A quartet of PIF bHLH factors provides a transcriptionally centered signaling hub that regulates seedling morphogenesis through differential expression-patterning of shared target genes in Arabidopsis. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003244 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Fiorucci, A. S. et al. PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR 7 is important for early responses to elevated temperature in Arabidopsis seedlings. N. Phytol. 226, 50–58 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Schwartz, Y. B. & Pirrotta, V. Polycomb silencing mechanisms and the management of genomic programmes. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8, 9–22 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schwartz, Y. B., Kahn, T. G., Dellino, G. I. & Pirrotta, V. Polycomb silencing mechanisms in Drosophila. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 69, 301–308 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sewalt, R. G. et al. Selective interactions between vertebrate polycomb homologs and the SUV39H1 histone lysine methyltransferase suggest that histone H3-K9 methylation contributes to chromosomal targeting of Polycomb group proteins. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 5539–5553 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang, J., Mager, J., Schnedier, E. & Magnuson, T. The mouse PcG gene eed is required for Hox gene repression and extraembryonic development. Mamm. Genome 13, 493–503 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Schuettengruber, B., Chourrout, D., Vervoort, M., Leblanc, B. & Cavalli, G. Genome regulation by polycomb and trithorax proteins. Cell 128, 735–745 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ciabrelli, F. & Cavalli, G. Chromatin-driven behavior of topologically associating domains. J. Mol. Biol. 427, 608–625 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Matharu, N. & Ahituv, N. Minor loops in major folds: enhancer–promoter looping, chromatin restructuring, and their association with transcriptional regulation and disease. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005640 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Liu, C. et al. Genome-wide analysis of chromatin packing in Arabidopsis thaliana at single-gene resolution. Genome Res. 26, 1057–1068 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Sasnauskas, G., Kauneckaite, K. & Siksnys, V. Structural basis of DNA target recognition by the B3 domain of Arabidopsis epigenome reader VAL1. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, 4316–4324 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Yuan, L. et al. The transcriptional repressors VAL1 and VAL2 recruit PRC2 for genome-wide Polycomb silencing in Arabidopsis. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, 98–113 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kim, J. et al. PIF1-interacting transcription factors and their binding sequence elements determine the in vivo targeting sites of PIF1. Plant Cell 28, 1388–1405 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Paik, I. et al. A phyB–PIF1–SPA1 kinase regulatory complex promotes photomorphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Nat. Commun. 10, 4216 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang, W. et al. Direct phosphorylation of HY5 by SPA kinases to regulate photomorphogenesis in Arabidopsis. New Phytol. 230, 2311–2326 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Lee, S., Paik, I. & Huq, E. SPAs promote thermomorphogenesis by regulating the phyB–PIF4 module in Arabidopsis. Development 147, dev189233 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Amasino and K. Torii for comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by NIH grant no. R01GM100108 and NSF IOS grant no. 1656764 to S.S. and NSF grant no. MCB-2014408 to E.H.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Junghyun Kim, Yogendra Bordiya, Praveen Kumar Kathare, Bo Zhao, Wei Zong, Enamul Huq & Sibum Sung

Authors
  1. Junghyun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yogendra Bordiya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Praveen Kumar Kathare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bo Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wei Zong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Enamul Huq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sibum Sung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.K., Y.B., P.K.K., B.Z., W.Z. and S.S. conceived of and implemented the method and performed the experiments and data analysis. J.K. and S.S. drafted the manuscript. S.S. and E.H. advised on the design and implementation and on the interpretation of the results and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sibum Sung.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Plants thanks Eirini Kaiserli, Rongcheng Lin and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

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

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 VIL1 and phyB synergistically inhibit hypocotyl elongation under various light conditions.

a, Hypocotyl length phenotype of seedlings of each genotypes grown for 7 days in long day (LD) (16 h light/8 h dark; 16 L/8D) or for 4 days in continuous white light (WLc) conditions. Scale bar: 5 mm. b - c, Quantification of hypocotyl length of seedlings grown in LD (b) or WLc (c), n = 25 seedlings. d, Hypocotyl length phenotype of seedlings of each genotype grown for 4 days in continuous red (Rc), far-red (FRc) or dark (Dc) conditions. The seedlings were treated with white light for 6 hours to induce germination before incubating under each light conditions. Scale bar: 5 mm. e - g, Quantification of hypocotyl length of seedlings grown in Rc (e), FRc (f), and Dc (g), n = 25 seedlings. In b - c and e - g, The box plot boundaries reflect the interquartile range, the horizontal line is the median and the whiskers represent 1.5X the interquartile range from the lower and upper quartiles. The letters above each box indicate statistical difference between the genotypes determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05).

Extended Data Fig. 2 VIL1 does not regulate the plant growth through PIF4.

Hypocotyl length of seedlings of each genotypes grown for 7 days at four different temperatures (12 °C, 17 °C, 22 °C, and 27 °C) in SD. b, Quantification of hypocotyl length, n = 20 seedlings. The box plot boundaries reflect the interquartile range, the horizontal line is the median and the whiskers represent 1.5X the interquartile range from the lower and upper quartiles. The letters marked as same color above each box indicate statistical difference between the genotypes at each temperature determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05). c and d, PIF4 mRNA expression in Col-0, vil1-1, phyB-9 and vil1-1phyB-9 seedlings grown for 7 days at four different temperatures in SD. Samples were collected at both ZT0 (c) and ZT6 (d). The expression levels were normalized to that of PP2A and further normalized by the transcript level of Col-0 at ZT0, at 12 °C. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). The letters marked as same color above each bar indicate statistical difference between the genotypes at each temperature determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05). e, Immunoblot analysis showing that endogenous PIF4 protein levels are not changed by vil1. Proteins were extracted from seven-day-old seedlings grown in SD at ZT6. Endogenous tubulin levels were detected as controls by anti-tubulin antibody. The experiment was repeated at least two times independently with similar results.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 3 VIL1 inhibits the plant growth by repressing growth-promoting genes.

a - c, mRNA expression of ATHB2 (a), HFR1 (b) and PIL1 (c) in Col-0, vil1-1, phyB-9 and vil1-1phyB-9 seedlings grown for 7 days at four different temperatures in SD. Samples were collected at ZT6. The expression levels were normalized to that of PP2A and further normalized by the transcript level of Col-0 at ZT0, at 12 °C shown in Fig. 1. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). The letters marked as same color above each bar indicate statistical difference between the genotypes at each temperature determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05).

Extended Data Fig. 4 The expression of growth-promoting genes is dependent on PIF4.

a - c, mRNA expression of ATHB2 (a), HFR1 (b) and PIL1 (c) in Col-0 and pif4-2 seedlings grown for 7 days at 22 °C in SD. Samples were collected both at ZT0 and at ZT6. The asterisks indicate significant difference (P < 0.05). d to f, mRNA expression of ATHB2 (d), HFR1 (e), and PIL1 (f) in Col-0, vil1-1, phyB-9, vil1-1 phyB-9, pif4-2, vil1-1 pif4-2, and vil1-1 phyB-9 pif4-2 seedlings grown for 7 days at 22 °C in SD. Samples were collected at ZT0. The expression levels were normalized to that of PP2A and further normalized by the expression level of Col-0. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). The letters above each bar indicate statistical difference between the genotypes determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05).

Extended Data Fig. 5 VIL1 alone does not regulate the expression of growth-promoting, hormone signaling genes.

a - d, mRNA expression of YUC8 (a, b) and IAA29 (c, d) in Col-0, vil1-1, phyB-9 and vil1-1phyB-9 seedlings grown for 7 days at four different temperatures in SD. Samples were collected at ZT0 (a, c) and ZT6 (b, d) respectively. The expression levels were normalized to that of PP2A and further normalized by the transcript level of Col-0 at ZT0, at 12 °C. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). The letters marked as same color above each bar indicate statistical difference between the genotypes at each temperature determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05).

Extended Data Fig. 6 VIL1 protein does not interact with PIF4 protein in vitro.

In vitro pull-down assay showing that MBP-VIL1 protein does not interact with GST-PIF4 proteins. MBP, MBP-VIL1 and MBP-SPA1 proteins were expressed in E. coli and purified using amylose-agarose beads. GST-PIF4 was also expressed in E. coli. Amylose-agarose bound MBP, MBP-VIL1 and MBP-SPA1 were used to pull-down different amount of purified GST-PIF4 protein. Pull-down samples were loaded 10% SDS-PAGE. GST-PIF4 was detected using anti-GST antibody, while the bait protein was visualized following Coomassie blue staining. The asterisks indicate each of MBP, MBP-VIL1 or MBP-SPA1 protein. The experiment was repeated at least two times independently with similar results.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 7 VIL1 and phyB directly regulate the expression of HFR1 and PIL1 by inducing H3K27me3 on their loci.

a and c, Hypocotyl length phenotype of VIL1 complementation lines (pVIL1:VIL1-myc/vil1-1 and pVIL1:VIL1-Flag/vil1-1) and another allele of vil1 mutant (vil1-2). The seedlings were grown for 7 days at 22 °C in SD. A scale bar = 5 mm. b and d, Quantification data of hypocotyl length shown in a, n = 25 seedlings. The box plot boundaries reflect the interquartile range, the horizontal line is the median and the whiskers represent 1.5X the interquartile range from the lower and upper quartiles. The letters above each box indicate statistical difference between the genotypes determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05). e, ATHB2, HFR1 and PIL1 loci, G-box elements, ChIP-qPCR amplicons. The red vertical bars indicate G-box regions. RE1, RE2, RE, P1, and P2 indicate ChIP-qPCR amplicons. f, ChIP assay showing the relative enrichments of VIL1-myc in phyB-9 on ATHB2, HFR1, and PIL1 loci by comparing to enrichments of VIL1-myc at ZT0 and at ZT6. The ChIP assay used anti-myc antibody on seven days old seedlings grown at 22 °C in SD. The immunoprecipitated DNA relative to input was further normalized to that of 5 S rDNA. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 3, biological replicates. The asterisks indicate statistical difference in a two-tailed student t-test (P < 0.05). g, H3K27me3 levels in Col-0, vil1-1, phyB-9, vil1-1phyB-9, and pif4-2 at ZT6. This ChIP assay used anti-H3K27me3 antibody and anti-H3 antibody. The y axis indicates H3K27me3 enrichment relative to H3 enrichment (normalized by that of 5 S rDNA). Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). The asterisks indicate statistical differences in a two-tailed student t-test (P < 0.05). n.s. indicates not significant.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 8 VIL1 protein is stabilized by light and VIL1 enrichment is dependent on phyB.

a and b, Diurnally regulated VIL1-myc protein levels (a) and VIL1 mRNA levels (b). a, The seedlings of pVIL1:VIL1-myc/vil1-1 transgenic plants grown at 22 °C in SD for 7 days were collected at eight different time points (ZT0 to ZT20). The VIL1-myc protein levels were detected by anti-myc antibody. Endogenous tubulin levels were detected as controls by anti-tubulin antibody. b, VIL1 mRNA levels in Col-0 seedlings grown at 22 °C in SD for 7 days. Samples were collected at eight different time points (ZT0 to ZT20). The expression levels are normalized to that of PP2A. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). c, VIL1-myc protein levels were stabilized in light. Four-day-old dark grown seedlings were either kept in the dark or treated with continuous red-light (10.7 µmol m-2 s-1) for the period indicated in the panel. Anti-myc and anti-RPT5 antibodies were used to detect VIL1-myc and RPT5 (control), respectively. d, Unchanged VIL1-myc protein levels in phyB-9 mutants. Proteins were extracted in the seedlings grown for 7 days at 22 °C in SD at ZT6. In a, c and d, all experiments were repeated at least two times independently with similar results. e, FLC locus with ChIP-qPCR amplicons (P1 and P2). f, Similar enrichments of VIL1 on FLC locus between at ZT0 and at ZT6. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 3, biological replicates. g, ChIP assay showing that relative enrichments of VIL1-myc on ATHB2 are reduced in phyB-9 at ZT6. Error bars: ± s.d. n = 3, biological replicates. f and g, The ChIP assay used anti-myc antibody on seven days old seedlings grown at 22 °C in SD. The immunoprecipitated DNA relative to input was further normalized to that of 5 S rDNA. In f and g, the asterisks indicate statistical difference in a two-tailed student t-test (***P < 0.0005, *P < 0.05), n.s. indicates not significant.

Extended Data Fig. 9 PRC2 targets the growth-promoting genes.

The IGV views showing the enrichments of CLF-GFP and SWN-GFP, and H3K27me3 in WT, clf, swn and clf swn double mutants on ATHB2, HFR1 and PIL1 loci.

Extended Data Fig. 10 phyB coordinates with PRC2 through VIL1 to regulate its target genes.

a, Hypocotyl length of seedlings of each genotypes grown for 7 days at four different temperatures (12 °C, 17 °C, 22 °C, and 27 °C) in SD. Scale bar: 5 mm. b, Quantification of hypocotyl length, n = 20 seedlings. c, Hypocotyl length of seedlings of Col-0, vil1-1, vrn2, phyB-9, vil1-1 phyB-9, and vrn2 phyB-9 grown for 7 days at 22 °C in SD, Scale bar: 5 mm, n = 20 seedlings. In b and c, the box plot boundaries reflect the interquartile range, the horizontal line is the median and the whiskers represent 1.5X the interquartile range from the lower and upper quartiles. The letters marked as same color above each box indicate statistical difference between the genotypes at each temperature determined by One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test for multiple comparisons (P < 0.05). d and e, Relative interaction frequency (RIF) in 3C assay between the Anchor primer and a series of F(forward) primers (d), or between the Anchor primer and a series of R(reverse) primers (e) in Col-0, and the vrn2 mutant at ZT6. The enrichment of each region was normalized to that of PP2A. These values were further normalized to the enrichment of each region in pATHB2:ATHB2-Flag plasmid DNAs. Error bars: ± s.d., n = 2, biological replicates (each biological replicate is an average value of four technical replicates). f and g, Model: A novel phyB regulatory module. f, phyB inhibits PIF4 by promoting its protein degradation and repression of DNA binding activity to repress the plant growth under the light. Our model shows a novel regulatory module in which the active form of phyB directly interacts with VIL1 to mediate chromatin remodeling at the growth-promoting genes by recruiting PRC2. Chromatin remodeling by the phyB-VIL1 module ensures the repression of growth-promoting genes, which otherwise can be activated by PIF4. g, On ATHB2 locus, active phyB forms a repressive chromatin loop with VIL1-PRC2. The presence of both phyB and VIL1 is important for the loop formation and for repressive H3K27me3 mark on this locus to fully inhibit ATHB2 expression. However, since neither phyB nor VIL1 can directly bind to DNA, it is possible that unknown DNA-binding protein (X) may be involved in phyB-VIL1 association with the target chromatin.

Supplementary information

Source data

Source Data Fig. 2

Unprocessed western blots.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 2

Unprocessed western blots.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 6

Unprocessed western blots.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 7

Unprocessed western blots.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, J., Bordiya, Y., Kathare, P.K. et al. Phytochrome B triggers light-dependent chromatin remodelling through the PRC2-associated PHD finger protein VIL1. Nat. Plants 7, 1213–1219 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-021-00986-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-021-00986-y

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing