4.7 Article

Optimization of Phenotyping Assays for the Model Monocot Setaria viridis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.02172

关键词

Setaria viridis; seedling growth and development; seed germination; phytohormones; abiotic stress; phenotyping

资金

  1. NIFA/AFRI [2015-67013-22964]
  2. NSF [IOS-1157942, MCB-1714693]
  3. National Science Foundation (NSF) [IOS-1413824]
  4. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1557942] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Setaria viridis (green foxtail) is an important model plant for the study of C4 photosynthesis in panicoid grasses, and is fast emerging as a system of choice for the study of plant development, domestication, abiotic stress responses and evolution. Basic research findings in Setaria are expected to advance research not only in this species and its close relative S. italica (foxtail millet), but also in other panicoid grasses, many of which are important food or bioenergy crops. Here we report on the standardization of multiple growth and development assays for S. viridis under controlled conditions, and in response to several phytohormones and abiotic stresses. We optimized these assays at three different stages of the plant's life: seed germination and post-germination growth using agar plate-based assays, early seedling growth and development using germination pouch-based assays, and adult plant growth and development under environmentally controlled growth chambers and greenhouses. These assays will be useful for the community to perform large scale phenotyping analyses, mutant screens, comparative physiological analysis, and functional characterization of novel genes of Setaria or other related agricultural crops. Precise description of various growth conditions, effective treatment conditions and description of the resultant phenotypes will help expand the use of S. viridis as an effective model system.

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