4.5 Article

Shoot branching in nutrient-limited Trifolium repens is primarily restricted by shortage of root-derived promoter signals

期刊

FUNCTIONAL PLANT BIOLOGY
卷 41, 期 4, 页码 401-410

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/FP13200

关键词

branching regulation, foliar nutrient supply, phosphorus deficiency, stoloniferous herbs, strigolactone, white clover.

资金

  1. New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, MeriNet program [C10X0404, C10X0816]
  2. New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) [C10X0816] Funding Source: New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two experiments were used to test the hypothesis that regulation of axillary bud outgrowth in nutrient-limited Trifolium repens L. (white clover) is primarily via variation in the net supply of root-derived promoter signal rather than via direct nutrient effects or inhibitory influences from apical or basal tissues. In the first experiment, foliar nutrient applications to a non-rooted portion of a nutrient-limited stem increased nutrient content, size of organs and rate of growth in the treated region but branch development remained suppressed, indicating that nutrient supply does not directly regulate branching. The second experiment, using decapitation and basal branch excision treatments, showed that excision of basal branches had a major stimulatory effect on bud outgrowth whereas decapitation of the primary stem had only a minor effect. This indicates dominant and minor roles in branching regulation for, respectively, root-derived promoter signal(s) and inhibitory apical influences (apical dominance), and that any possible influence of the inhibitory strigolactone pathway on bud outgrowth is captured within the net root-derived promoter influence. Thus, the proposed hypothesis was supported by our results. These findings may be relevant for all species within the group of prostrate nodally-rooting clonal herbs.

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

4.5
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