And B) and fusion of the axillary shoot to the main stem was observed in 60940-34-3 abcb19 cuc3,showing the phenotype equivalence between abcb19 cuc3 and cuc2 cuc3 (Figure 5A, shown by an white arrow) [8]; however, the degree of fusion was still less than that seen in cuc2 cuc3, due to the residual expression of CUC2 in abcb19-5. cuc2 enhanced the fusion MedChemExpress CASIN defects in abcb19-5 slightly and less effectively than cuc3 (Figure 5A and B). We next determined the frequency ( ) of fusion defects at stem-cauline leaf junctions. In primary stem-cauline leaf junctions, the number of fusion events 
in abcb195 25033180 cuc3-105 was significantly increased compared with abcb19-5 (Figure 5C); in comparison, the number of fusion events in abcb195 cuc2 was not significantly different from abcb19-5 (Figure 5C). The rate of fusion in abcb19 cuc3 was even higher than that in cucABCB19 Regulates Postembryonic Organ SeparationFigure 2. abcb19-5 is a new T-DNA insertion allele of ABCB19. A: The upper model shows the gene structure of ABCB19. The filled black boxes and lines represent exons and introns, respectively. The lower model shows the protein structure of ABCB19. The protein domain information was analyzed at http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de. The gray boxes and ellipses represent the transmembrane domains and ATP-binding domains in ABCB19, respectively. P1, P2, P3 and P4 are primers used in transcript identification. TAIL-PCR revealed that the T-DNA insertion in abcb19-5 was in the last exon and the ATP-binding domain in ABCB19 (shown by triangles). The electrophoretic image shows that abcb19-5 expressed a partial transcript (P3/P4) rather than the full-length transcript (P1/P2). Rosette leaves (B), leaf-stem fusion (C), and stem-pedicel fusion defects (D) in F1 plants of abcb19-56abcb19-3, abcb19-3 (mdr1-3), and abcb19-5. E-H Transgenic complementation of abcb19-5 by CaMV 35S::ABCB19. E RNA expression level of abcb19-5 in two transgenic recovered plants (Re-1 and -2 are two representative recovered lines). The upper and lower panels represent ABCB19 and ACTIN, respectively. F The rosette leaf shape was complemented by ABCB19. G and H Restoration of the stem-cauline leaf and stem-pedicel fusion defects. Arrowheads indicate the fusion sites. Scale = 10 mm in B and F, and 2 mm in C, D, G, and H. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060809.gcuc3, however, the difference was not significant shown by the t-test (Figure 5C). In general, the lesion of cuc3 significantly reinforced the fusion defects in abcb19 in terms of the degree and frequency of fusions, while cuc2 contributed less. This is largely consistent with the reduced expression of CUC2 (but not of CUC3) in abcb19 (Figure 4).Other organ boundary-specific genes besides CUC2 may be involved in ABCB19-mediated organ separationAs CUC2 and CUC3 participate redundantly in postembryonic organ separation, each single mutant shows no obvious fusion defect [8]; thus, only reduction 
in CUC2 in abcb19 does not account for the organ fusion phenotype observed. Since ABCB19 acts as an auxin transporter, the auxin distribution pattern in abcb19 is altered obviously (Figure 3). Auxin is such an important regulator of plant development that a number of factors may be changed to varying degrees at the organ boundaries in abcb19. Variations in these factors together with the down-regulation of CUC2 may contribute to the fusion defect observed in abcb19. We tested a number of organ boundary-specific factors in abcb19 by semi-quantitative RT-PCR, and obs.And B) and fusion of the axillary shoot to the main stem was observed in abcb19 cuc3,showing the phenotype equivalence between abcb19 cuc3 and cuc2 cuc3 (Figure 5A, shown by an white arrow) [8]; however, the degree of fusion was still less than that seen in cuc2 cuc3, due to the residual expression of CUC2 in abcb19-5. cuc2 enhanced the fusion defects in abcb19-5 slightly and less effectively than cuc3 (Figure 5A and B). We next determined the frequency ( ) of fusion defects at stem-cauline leaf junctions. In primary stem-cauline leaf junctions, the number of fusion events in abcb195 25033180 cuc3-105 was significantly increased compared with abcb19-5 (Figure 5C); in comparison, the number of fusion events in abcb195 cuc2 was not significantly different from abcb19-5 (Figure 5C). The rate of fusion in abcb19 cuc3 was even higher than that in cucABCB19 Regulates Postembryonic Organ SeparationFigure 2. abcb19-5 is a new T-DNA insertion allele of ABCB19. A: The upper model shows the gene structure of ABCB19. The filled black boxes and lines represent exons and introns, respectively. The lower model shows the protein structure of ABCB19. The protein domain information was analyzed at http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de. The gray boxes and ellipses represent the transmembrane domains and ATP-binding domains in ABCB19, respectively. P1, P2, P3 and P4 are primers used in transcript identification. TAIL-PCR revealed that the T-DNA insertion in abcb19-5 was in the last exon and the ATP-binding domain in ABCB19 (shown by triangles). The electrophoretic image shows that abcb19-5 expressed a partial transcript (P3/P4) rather than the full-length transcript (P1/P2). Rosette leaves (B), leaf-stem fusion (C), and stem-pedicel fusion defects (D) in F1 plants of abcb19-56abcb19-3, abcb19-3 (mdr1-3), and abcb19-5. E-H Transgenic complementation of abcb19-5 by CaMV 35S::ABCB19. E RNA expression level of abcb19-5 in two transgenic recovered plants (Re-1 and -2 are two representative recovered lines). The upper and lower panels represent ABCB19 and ACTIN, respectively. F The rosette leaf shape was complemented by ABCB19. G and H Restoration of the stem-cauline leaf and stem-pedicel fusion defects. Arrowheads indicate the fusion sites. Scale = 10 mm in B and F, and 2 mm in C, D, G, and H. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060809.gcuc3, however, the difference was not significant shown by the t-test (Figure 5C). In general, the lesion of cuc3 significantly reinforced the fusion defects in abcb19 in terms of the degree and frequency of fusions, while cuc2 contributed less. This is largely consistent with the reduced expression of CUC2 (but not of CUC3) in abcb19 (Figure 4).Other organ boundary-specific genes besides CUC2 may be involved in ABCB19-mediated organ separationAs CUC2 and CUC3 participate redundantly in postembryonic organ separation, each single mutant shows no obvious fusion defect [8]; thus, only reduction in CUC2 in abcb19 does not account for the organ fusion phenotype observed. Since ABCB19 acts as an auxin transporter, the auxin distribution pattern in abcb19 is altered obviously (Figure 3). Auxin is such an important regulator of plant development that a number of factors may be changed to varying degrees at the organ boundaries in abcb19. Variations in these factors together with the down-regulation of CUC2 may contribute to the fusion defect observed in abcb19. We tested a number of organ boundary-specific factors in abcb19 by semi-quantitative RT-PCR, and obs.