4.7 Article

Structural requirements of strigolactones for germination induction and inhibition of Striga gesnerioides seeds

期刊

PLANT CELL REPORTS
卷 32, 期 6, 页码 829-838

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00299-013-1429-y

关键词

Striga gesnerioides; Striga hermonthica; Strigolactone; Germination induction; Germination inhibition

资金

  1. JST/JICA, Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development (SATREPS)
  2. Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture of Japan [23405023, 24658111]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23580149, 23405023, 24658111] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Structure-activity relationship studies of strigolactones and Striga gesnerioides seed germination revealed strict structural requirements for germination induction and a new function of the plant hormones as germination inhibitors. Stereoisomers of the naturally occurring strigolactones, strigol, sorgolactone, orobanchol, sorgomol and 5-deoxystrigol, 36 in total, were prepared and screened for the ability to induce and/or inhibit the germination of Striga hermonthica and Striga gesnerioides seeds collected from mature plants that parasitized on sorghum and cowpea, respectively. All of the compounds induced S. hermonthica seed germination, albeit displayed differential activities. On the other hand, only a limited number of the compounds induced significant germination in S. gesnerioides, thus indicating strict structural requirements. Strigolactones inducing high germination in S. gesnerioides induced low germination in S. hermonthica. Strigolactones with the same configuration at C3a, C8b and C2' as that in 5-deoxystrigol (9a) induced high germination of S. hermonthica seeds, but most of them inhibited the germination of S. gesnerioides. The differential response of S. gesnerioides to strigolactones may play an important role in the survival of the species. However, the compounds could be used as means of control if mixed cropping of cowpea and sorghum is adopted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据