4.7 Article

Molecular phylogeny and forms of photosynthesis in tribe Salsoleae (Chenopodiaceae)

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 68, 期 2, 页码 207-223

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erw432

关键词

Ancestral character state reconstruction; C-2 pathway; C-3-C-4 intermediates; CO2 compensation point; leaf anatomy; TEM; western blots

资金

  1. National Science Foundation under funds MCB [1146928]
  2. Russian Foundation of Basic Research [12-04-00721, 15-04-03665]
  3. German Science Foundation (DFG) [KA1816/7-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While many C-4 lineages have Kranz anatomy around individual veins, Salsoleae have evolved the Salsoloid Kranz anatomy where a continuous dual layer of chlorenchyma cells encloses the vascular and water-storage tissue. With the aim of elucidating the evolution of C-4 photosynthesis in Salsoleae, a broadly sampled molecular phylogeny and anatomical survey was conducted, together with biochemical, microscopic, and physiological analyses of selected photosynthetic types. From analyses of photosynthetic phenotypes, a model for evolution of this form of C-4 was compared with models for evolution of Kranz anatomy around individual veins. A functionally C-3 proto-Kranz phenotype (Proto-Kranz Sympegmoid) and intermediates with a photorespiratory pump (Kranz-like Sympegmoid and Kranz-like Salsoloid types) are considered crucial transitional steps towards C-4 development. The molecular phylogeny provides evidence for C-3 being the ancestral photosynthetic pathway but there is no phylogenetic evidence for the ancestry of C-3-C-4 intermediacy with respect to C-4 in Salsoleae. Traits considered advantageous in arid conditions, such as annual life form, central sclerenchyma in leaves, and reduction of surface area, evolved repeatedly in Salsoleae. The recurrent evolution of a green stem cortex taking over photosynthesis in C-4 clades of Salsoleae concurrent with leaf reduction was probably favoured by the higher productivity of the C-4 cycle.

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