4.7 Article

The brassinosteroid growth response in pea is not mediated by changes in gibberellin content

Journal

PLANTA
Volume 221, Issue 1, Pages 141-148

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00425-004-1454-8

Keywords

brassinosteroid; gibberellin; hormone interactions; mutants; Pisum; stem elongation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to increase our understanding of the relationship between brassinosteroids (BRs) and gibberellins (GAs) by examining the effects of BR deficiency on the GA biosynthesis pathway in several tissue types of pea (Pisum sativum L.). It was suggested recently that, in Arabidopsis, BRs act as positive regulators of GA 20-oxidation, a key step in GA biosynthesis [Bouquin et al. (2001) Plant Physiol 127:450-458]. However, this may not be the case in pea as GA(20) levels were consistently higher in all shoot tissues of BR-deficient (lk and lkb) and BR-response (lka) mutants. The application of brassinolide (BL) to lkb plants reduced GA(20) levels, and metabolism studies revealed a reduced conversion of GA(19) to GA(20) in epi-BL-treated lkb plants. These results indicate that BRs actually negatively regulate GA(20) levels in pea. Although GA(20) levels are affected by BR levels, this does not result in consistent changes in the level of the bioactive GA, GA(1). Therefore, even though a clear interaction exists between endogenous BR levels and the level of GA(20), this interaction may not be biologically significant. In addition to the effect of BRs on GA levels, the effect of altered GA(1) levels on endogenous BR levels was examined. There was no significant difference in BR levels between the GA mutants and the wild type (wt), indicating that altered GA(1) levels have no effect on BR levels in pea. It appears that the BR growth response is not mediated by changes in bioactive GA levels, thus providing further evidence that BRs are important regulators of stem elongation.

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