4.8 Article

Enhanced Stomatal Conductance by a Spontaneous Arabidopsis Tetraploid, Me-0, Results from Increased Stomatal Size and Greater Stomatal Aperture

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 170, 期 3, 页码 1435-1444

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1104/pp.15.01450

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan [21114002, 26221103, 15K18556, 243688]
  2. Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology from Japan Science and Technology Agency
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15K18556, 26221103] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The rate of gas exchange in plants is regulated mainly by stomatal size and density. Generally, higher densities of smaller stomata are advantageous for gas exchange; however, it is unclear what the effect of an extraordinary change in stomatal size might have on a plant's gas-exchange capacity. We investigated the stomatal responses to CO2 concentration changes among 374 Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) ecotypes and discovered that Mechtshausen (Me-0), a natural tetraploid ecotype, has significantly larger stomata and can achieve a high stomatal conductance. We surmised that the cause of the increased stomatal conductance is tetraploidization; however, the stomatal conductance of another tetraploid accession, tetraploid Columbia (Col), was not as high as that in Me-0. One difference between these two accessions was the size of their stomatal apertures. Analyses of abscisic acid sensitivity, ion balance, and gene expression profiles suggested that physiological or genetic factors restrict the stomatal opening in tetraploid Col but not in Me-0. Our results show that Me-0 overcomes the handicap of stomatal opening that is typical for tetraploids and achieves higher stomatal conductance compared with the closely related tetraploid Col on account of larger stomatal apertures. This study provides evidence for whether larger stomatal size in tetraploids of higher plants can improve stomatal conductance.

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