4.4 Review

Application of a single-solute non-steady-state phloem model to the study of long-distance assimilate transport

期刊

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
卷 220, 期 4, 页码 419-455

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.2003.3115

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A mass-balanced, finite-difference solution to Munch's osmotically generated pressure-flow hypothesis is developed for the study of non-steady-state sucrose transport in the phloem tissue of plants. Major improvements over previous modeling efforts are the inclusion of wall elasticity, nonlinear functions of viscosity and solute potential, an enhanced calculation of sieve pore resistance, and the introduction of a slope-limiting total variation diminishing method for determining the concentration of sucrose at node boundaries. The numerical properties of the model are discussed, as is the history of the modeling of pressure-driven phloem transport. Idealized results are presented for a sharp, fast-moving concentration front, and the effect of changing sieve tube length on the transport of sucrose in both the steady-state and non-steady-state cases is examined. Most of the resistance to transport is found to be axial, rather than radial (via membrane transport), and most of the axial resistance is due to the sieve plates. Because of the sieve plates, sieve tube elasticity does not provide a significant enhancement to conductivity at high pressure, as previously suspected. The transit time of sucrose through a sieve tube is found to be inversely proportional to the square of the sieve tube's length; following that observation, it is suggested that 20 1-m-long sieve tubes could transport sucrose 20 times faster than a single 20 in sieve tube. Short sieve tubes would be highly sensitive to differentials between loading and unloading rate, and would require close cooperation with adjacent companion cells for proper function. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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