4.6 Article

Root cortical aerenchyma inhibits radial nutrient transport in maize (Zea mays)

Journal

ANNALS OF BOTANY
Volume 113, Issue 1, Pages 181-189

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mct259

Keywords

Aerenchyma; radial transport; root; nutrient uptake; phosphorus; sulfur; calcium; maize; Zea mays

Categories

Funding

  1. USDA NRI Plant Biology Program [2007-02001]
  2. Direct For Biological Sciences
  3. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [0965380] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Formation of root cortical aerenchyma (RCA) can be induced by nutrient deficiency. In species adapted to aerobic soil conditions, this response is adaptive by reducing root maintenance requirements, thereby permitting greater soil exploration. One trade-off of RCA formation may be reduced radial transport of nutrients due to reduction in living cortical tissue. To test this hypothesis, radial nutrient transport in intact roots of maize (Zea mays) was investigated in two radiolabelling experiments employing genotypes with contrasting RCA. In the first experiment, time-course dynamics of phosphate loading into the xylem were measured from excised nodal roots that varied in RCA formation. In the second experiment, uptake of phosphate, calcium and sulphate was measured in seminal roots of intact young plants in which variation in RCA was induced by treatments altering ethylene action or genetic differences. In each of three paired genotype comparisons, the rate of phosphate exudation of high-RCA genotypes was significantly less than that of low-RCA genotypes. In the second experiment, radial nutrient transport of phosphate and calcium was negatively correlated with the extent of RCA for some genotypes. The results support the hypothesis that RCA can reduce radial transport of some nutrients in some genotypes, which could be an important trade-off of this trait.

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