Figure 1

Side by side comparison of the physiological roles of PRMT5 and PRMT4. (A and B) Flowering time measured as the number of rosette leaves at bolting in Long Day (A) and Short Day (B) photoperiods. ANOVA followed by a Tukey’s multiple comparision test was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences observed between genotypes. Errors bars indicate SD (**: significantly different than WT and prmt4a;4b, *: significantly different than WT, both cases p ≤ 0,05). (C) Circadian rhythms of leaf movement in continuous light (N = 10). (D) Period of the circadian rhythms was estimated with BRASS 3.0 software (*: significantly different, p ≤ 0,05). (E and F) Hypocotyl length of seedlings grown under continuous red light (E) or continuous blue light (F) (N = 6 replicates of 10 seedlings each, *: significantly different than WT, p ≤ 0,05). (G) Comparison of root growth on MS medium with 100 mM NaCl. Root growth was measured relative to controls. More than 30 roots were measured for each data point. Data represents the mean with SD of three independent experiments (**: significantly different than WT and prmt4a;4b, *: significantly different than WT, both cases p ≤ 0,05). (H) Salt tolerance was assessed through the analysis of survival rate on MS medium containing 160 mM NaCl. Data represents the mean with SD of three independent experiments (N > 50, *: significantly different than WT, p ≤ 0,05).