4.7 Article

Arabidopsis thaliana as a model species for xylem hydraulics: does size matter?

Journal

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
Volume 64, Issue 8, Pages 2295-2305

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/ert087

Keywords

Arabidopsis thaliana; bordered pit; cavitation resistance; hydraulic conductivity; inflorescence stem; xylem

Categories

Funding

  1. PitBulles project (ANR) [2010 Blan 171001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

While Arabidopsis thaliana has been proposed as a model species for wood development, the potential of this tiny herb for studying xylem hydraulics remains unexplored and anticipated by scepticism. Inflorescence stems of A. thaliana were used to measure hydraulic conductivity and cavitation resistance, whereas light and electron microscopy allowed observations of vessels. In wild-type plants, measured and theoretical conductivity showed a significant correlation (R-2 0.80, P < 0.01). Moreover, scaling of vessel dimensions and intervessel pit structure of A. thaliana were consistent with structurefunction relationships of woody plants. The reliability and resolution of the hydraulic methods applied to measure vulnerability to cavitation were addressed by comparing plants grown under different photoperiods or different mutant lines. Sigmoid vulnerability curves of A. thaliana indicated a pressure corresponding to 50% loss of hydraulic conductance (P-50) between 3 and 2.5MPa for short-day and long-day plants, respectively. Polygalacturonase mutants showed a higher P-50 value (2.25MPa), suggesting a role for pectins in vulnerability to cavitation. The application of A. thaliana as a model species for xylem hydraulics provides exciting possibilities for (1) exploring the molecular basis of xylem anatomical features and (2) understanding genetic mechanisms behind xylem functional traits such as cavitation resistance. Compared to perennial woody species, however, the lesser amount of xylem in A. thaliana has its limitations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available