4.6 Article

Ethylene and rooting of mung bean cuttings. The role of auxin induced ethylene synthesis and phase-dependent effects

Journal

PLANT GROWTH REGULATION
Volume 56, Issue 2, Pages 203-209

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10725-008-9301-8

Keywords

ACC; adventitious root formation; auxin; micropropagation; STS; vigna radiata

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have re-examined the role of ethylene during rooting of mung bean cuttings. Cuttings were treated for 5 days with a low or a high concentration of NAA (naphthaleneacetic acid). During this 5 days period, we also applied STS (silverthiosulfate, an inhibitor of ethylene action) or ACC (1-aminocyclo-propane-l-carboxylic acid, a direct precursor of ethylene). At high NAA concentration, STS promoted and ACC inhibited rooting, respectively. At low NAA concentration, the effects were opposite, STS being inhibitory and ACC promotive. AVG (aminoethoxyvinylglycine, an inhibitor of ethylene synthesis) gave similar results as STS. Together, these data suggest supraoptimal and suboptimal ethylene levels in the tissue at high and low NAA concentration, respectively. We also examined whether the effect of ethylene varied during the successive phases of the rooting process. Thus, we gave 24 h pulses with either STS or ACC during the rooting treatment. During the first two days (0-48 h), ACC-pulses were promotive and STS-pulses inhibitory. Later on (48-168 h), the ACC-pulses were inhibitory and the STS-pulses promotive. Whether this effect was observed or not was dependent on the NAA concentration. These data indicate that ethylene promotes or inhibits rooting depending on the stage in the rooting process. When ACC was added only during the initial period, rooting was increased at all NAA concentrations in a NAA dose-response curve and the optimal NAA concentration remained the same. This suggests that ethylene renders more cells responsive to NAA.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available