4.7 Article

Distinct effects of auxin and light on adventitious root development in Eucalyptus saligna and Eucalyptus globulus

Journal

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 7, Pages 457-464

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/21.7.457

Keywords

dark treatment; phytohormones; recalcitrance; rhizogenesis; rooting capacity; rooting time

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Adventitious rooting is essential for vegetative propagation of woody species. We studied the effects of auxin and light on the development of adventitious roots in cuttings obtained from seedlings of Eucalyptus saligna Smith and E. globulus Labill in an attempt to characterize the adventitious rooting process and identify factors controlling rhizogenesis. Root development was scored as rooting percentage, root density (roots per rooted cutting), mean rooting time and root length, In both species, rooting time was reduced in the presence of auxin, Cuttings from 2-month-old E. saligna seedlings were responsive to lower auxin concentrations than comparable cuttings from E. globulus seedlings. Cuttings from 3-month-old E. saligna seedlings rooted promptly and rooting was not significantly affected by light conditions. In contrast, rooting of cuttings from 3-month-old E, globulus seedlings exhibited recalcitrant behavior and no roots were formed if illuminated during the root formation phase. Effective root regeneration of E. globulus cuttings was obtained by a 4-day exposure to 10 mg l(-1) IBA and culture in darkness during the root formation step. Loss of rooting capacity with seedling age was more pronounced in E, globulus than in E. saligna. The possibility of switching adventitious rooting off and on by manipulating light regime and exogenous auxin supply in E, globulus, and the constitutive nature of rooting in E, saligna may provide useful models for examining the rooting process at the biochemical and molecular levels in Eucalyptus.

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