Extended Data Fig. 4: Disruptions of CRY1 and CRY2 do not affect DNA damage accumulation in red light.

a, b, WT and cry1 cry2 mutant seedlings showing similar root development under red light. The seedlings were grown in red light (30 μmol/m²/s) for 7 d before they were photographed (a) and their root lengths were measured (b). Scale bar, 5 mm. The data are mean ± SD (n = 30). c, d, WT and cry1 cry2 mutant roots showing similar root apical meristem regions under red light. The seedlings were grown in red light (30 μmol/m²/s) for 7 d before they were stained with propidium iodide (PI). The root apical meristem regions of the seedlings were indicated between the white arrowheads (c), and the number of cells within the root apical meristem was measured (d). Scale bars, 50 μm. The data are mean ± SD (n = 15 seedlings per each genotype). e, f, Comet assays (e) and statistical analyses (f) showing no difference in accumulation of damaged DNA in cry1 cry2 mutant and WT under red light. The leaves of WT and cry1 cry2 seedlings grown under red light (30 μmol/m²/s) for 2 weeks were subjected to comet assays. Scale bars, 50 μm. The statistical data for DNA in tail are mean ± SD (n = 15). Statistical significance was analyzed by t test. ns, no statistical significance (b, d, f).