4.8 Article

Difference in Abscisic Acid Perception Mechanisms between Closure Induction and Opening Inhibition of Stomata

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 163, 期 2, 页码 600-610

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1104/pp.113.223826

关键词

-

资金

  1. Nissan Science Foundation
  2. Ohara Foundation for Agricultural Research
  3. [24114709]
  4. [22119005]
  5. [17078006]
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24114709, 21227001, 22119005, 23370019] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Abscisic acid (ABA) induces stomatal closure and inhibits light-induced stomatal opening. The mechanisms in these two processes are not necessarily the same. It has been postulated that the ABA receptors involved in opening inhibition are different from those involved in closure induction. Here, we provide evidence that four recently identified ABA receptors (PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE1 [PYR1], PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE-LIKE1 [PYL1], PYL2, and PYL4) are not sufficient for opening inhibition in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). ABA-induced stomatal closure was impaired in the pyr1/pyl1/pyl2/pyl4 quadruple ABA receptor mutant. ABA inhibition of the opening of the mutant's stomata remained intact. ABA did not induce either the production of reactive oxygen species and nitric oxide or the alkalization of the cytosol in the quadruple mutant, in accordance with the closure phenotype. Whole cell patch-clamp analysis of inward-rectifying K+ current in guard cells showed a partial inhibition by ABA, indicating that the ABA sensitivity of the mutant was not fully impaired. ABA substantially inhibited blue light-induced phosphorylation of H+-ATPase in guard cells in both the mutant and the wild type. On the other hand, in a knockout mutant of the SNF1-related protein kinase, srk2e, stomatal opening and closure, reactive oxygen species and nitric oxide production, cytosolic alkalization, inward-rectifying K+ current inactivation, and H+-ATPase phosphorylation were not sensitive to ABA.

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

4.8
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