Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Long-distance signalling and a mutational analysis of branching in pea

  • Published:
Plant Growth Regulation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Four ramosus mutants with increased branching at basal andaerial nodes have been used to investigate the genetic regulation of budoutgrowth in Pisum sativum L. (garden pea). Studies oflong-distance signalling, xylem sap cytokinin concentrations, shootauxin level, auxin transport and auxin response are discussed. A modelof branching control is presented that encompasses twograft-transmissible signals in addition to auxin and cytokinin. Mutantsrms1 through rms4 are not deficient in indole-3-aceticacid (IAA) or in the basipetal transport of this hormone. Three of thefour mutants, rms1, rms3 and rms4, have veryreduced cytokinin concentrations in xylem sap from roots. This reductionin xylem sap cytokinin concentration appears to be caused by a propertyof the shoot and may be part of a feedback mechanism induced by anaspect of bud outgrowth. The shoot-to-root feedback signal is unlikelyto be auxin itself, as auxin levels and transport are not correlatedwith xylem sap cytokinin concentrations in various intact and graftedmutant and wild-type plants. Rms1 and Rms2 act inshoot and rootstock to regulate the level or transport ofgraft-transmissible signals. Various grafting studies and double mutantanalyses have associated Rms2 with the regulation of theshoot-to-root feedback signal. Rms1 is associated with a secondunknown graft-transmissible signal that is postulated to move in thedirection of root-to-shoot. Exogenous auxin appears to interact withboth of the signals regulated by Rms1 and Rms2 in theinhibition of branching after decapitation. The action of Rms3and Rms4 is less apparent at this stage, although both appearto act largely in the shoot.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Apisitwanich S, Swiecicki WK and Wolko B (1992) A new ramosus gene on chromosome 5. Pisum Genet 24: 14-15

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arumingtyas EL, Floyd RS, Gregory MJ and Murfet IC (1992) Branching in Pisum: inheritance and allelism tests with 17 ramosus mutants. Pisum Genet 24: 17-31

    Google Scholar 

  3. Asokanthan PS, Critchley C, Turnbull CGN and Beveridge CA (1999) Characterisation of senescence physiology in pea mutants with altered cytokinin status. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Australian Society of Plant Physiologists Conference, Gold Coast

  4. Bangerth F (1994) Response of cytokinin concentration in the xylem exudate of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants to decapitation and auxin treatment, and relationship to apical dominance. Planta 194: 439-442

    Google Scholar 

  5. Beck E (1996) Regulation of shoot/root ratio by cytokinins from roots in Urtica dioica: Opinion. Plant Soil 185: 3-12

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beveridge CA, Murfet IC, Kerhoas L, Sotta B, Miginiac E and Rameau C (1997) The shoot controls zeatin riboside export from pea roots. Evidence from the branching mutant rms4. Plant J 11: 339-345

    Google Scholar 

  7. Beveridge CA, Ross JJ and Murfet IC (1994) Branching mutant rms-2 in Pisum sativum. Grafting studies and endogenous indole-3-acetic acid levels. Plant Physiol 104: 953-959

    Google Scholar 

  8. Beveridge CA, Ross JJ and Murfet IC (1996) Branching in pea. Action of genes Rms3 and Rms4. Plant Physiol 110: 859-865

    Google Scholar 

  9. Beveridge CA, Symons GM, Murfet IC, Ross JJ and Rameau C (1997) The rms1 mutant of pea has elevated indole-3-acetic acid levels and reduced root sap zeatin riboside content but increased branching controlled by graft transmissible signal(s). Plant Physiol 115: 1251-1258

    Google Scholar 

  10. Beveridge CA, Turnbull CGN and Symons GM (2000) Auxin inhibition of branching in decapitated plants is dependent on graft-transmissible signalling controlled by the Rms1 and Rms2 genes. Plant Physiol 123: 689-697

    Google Scholar 

  11. Blake TJ, Reid DM and Rood SB (1983) Ethylene, indoleacetic acid and apical dominance in peas: a reappraisal. Physiol Plant 59: 481-487

    Google Scholar 

  12. Blažková J, Krekule J, MacháČková I, Procházka S (1999) Auxins and cytokinins in the control of apical dominance in pea-A differential response due to bud position. J Plant Physiol 154: 691-969

    Google Scholar 

  13. Boerjan W, Cervera M-T, Delarue M, Beeckman T, Dewitte W, Bellini C, Caboche M, Van Onckelen H, Van Montagu M and Inzé D (1995) superroot, a recessive mutation in Arabidopsis, confers auxin overproduction. Plant Cell 7: 1405-1419

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brenner ML, Wolley DJ, Sjut V and Salerno D (1987) Analysis of apical dominance in relation to IAA transport. Hort Sci 22: 833-835

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cline MG (1996) Exogenous auxin effects on lateral bud outgrowth in decapitated shoots. Ann Bot 78: 255-266

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dodd IC, Beveridge CA and Munns RE (1998) Do xylem sap cytokinins control stomatal conductance? Evidence from the ramosus pea mutants. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Plant Growth Substances, 1998, Japan

  17. Else MA, Hall KC, Arnold GM, Davies WJ and Jackson MB (1995) Export of abscisic acid, 1-aminocyclopropane-1carboxylic acid, phosphate, and nitrate from roots to shoots of flooded tomato plants. Accounting for effects of xylem sap flow rates on concentration and delivery. Plant Physiol 107: 377-384

    Google Scholar 

  18. Faiss M, Zalubilova J, Strnad M and Schmulling T (1997) Conditional transgenic expression of the ipt gene indicates a function for cytokinins in paracrine signalling in whole tobacco plants. Plant J 12: 401-415

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gocal GFW, Pharis RP, Young EC and Pearce D (1991) Changes after decapitation in concentration of indole-3-acetic acid and abscisic acid in the larger axillary bud of Phaseolus vulgaris L. cv Tender Green. Plant Physiol 95: 344-350

    Google Scholar 

  20. Husain SM and Linck AJ (1966) Relationship of apical dominance to the nutrient accumulation pattern in Pisum sativum var. Alaska. Physiol Plant 19: 992-1010

    Google Scholar 

  21. Klee H and Estelle M (1991) Molecular approaches to plant hormone biology. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 42: 529-551

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lejeune P, Kinet J and Bernier G (1988) Cytokinin fluxes during floral induction in the long day plant Sinapis alba L. Plant Physiol 86: 1095-1098

    Google Scholar 

  23. Leyser O (1997) Auxin: Lessons from a mutant weed. Physiol Plant 100, 407-414

    Google Scholar 

  24. Li CJ, Guevara E, Gerrera J and Bangerth F (1995) Effect of apex excision and replacement by 1-naphthylacetic acid on cytokinin concentration and apical dominance in pea plants. Physiol Plant 94: 465-469

    Google Scholar 

  25. Matsubara S (1990) Structure-activity relationships of cytokinins. Crit Rev Plant Sci 9: 17-57

    Google Scholar 

  26. McIntyre GI and Cessna AJ (1990) Apical dominance in Phaseolus vulgaris: effect of nitrogen supply. Can J Bot 69: 1337-1343

    Google Scholar 

  27. Napoli CA (1996) Highly branched phenotype of the petunia dad1-1 mutant is reversed by grafting. Plant Physiol 111: 27-37

    Google Scholar 

  28. Napoli CA, Beveridge CA and Snowden KC (1999) Reevaluating concepts of apical dominance and the control of axillary bud outgrowth. Curr Topics Dev Biol 44: 127-169

    Google Scholar 

  29. Noodén LD and Letham DS (1993) Cytokinin metabolism and signalling in the soybean plant. Aust J Plant Physiol 20: 639-653

    Google Scholar 

  30. Prinsen E, Kaminek M and van Onckelen HA (1997) Cytokinin biosynthesis: a black box? Plant Growth Regul 23: 3-15

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rameau C, Bodelin C, Cadier D, Grandjean O, Miard F and Murfet IC (1997) New ramosus mutants at loci Rms1, Rms3 and Rms4 resulting from the mutation breeding program at Versailles. Pisum Genet 29: 7-12

    Google Scholar 

  32. Rubinstein B and Nagao MA (1976) Lateral bud outgrowth and its control by the apex. Bot Rev 42: 83-113

    Google Scholar 

  33. Russel W and Thimann KV (1990) The second messenger in apical dominance controlled by auxin. In Plant Growth Substances 1988, RP Pharis and SB Rood, eds, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 419-427

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sachs T and Thimann KV (1967) The role of auxins and cytokinins in the release of buds from apical dominance. Amer J Bot 45: 136-144

    Google Scholar 

  35. Schmitz G and Theres K (1999) Genetic control of branching in Arabidopsis and tomato. Curr Opinion Plant Biol 2: 51-55

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sherrif LJ, McKay M, Ross JJ, Reid JB and Willis CL (1994) Decapitation reduces the metabolism of gibberellin A20 to A1 in Pisum sativum L., decreasing the Le/le difference. Plant Physiol 104: 277-280

    Google Scholar 

  37. Snow R (1937) On the nature of correlative inhibition. New Phytol 36: 283-300

    Google Scholar 

  38. Stafstrom JP (1993) Axillary bud development in pea: Apical dominance, growth cycles, hormonal regulation and plant architecture. In: Amasino RM (ed) Cellular Communication in Plants, pp 75-86. New York: Plenum Press

    Google Scholar 

  39. Stafstrom JP (1995) Developmental potential of shoot buds. In: Gartner BL (ed) Physiology and Functional Morphology, pp 257-279. San Diego: Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  40. Stahlberg R and Cosgrove DJ (1992) Rapid alterations in growth rate and electrical potentials upon stem excision in pea seedlings. Planta 187: 523-531

    Google Scholar 

  41. Strnad M (1997) The aromatic cytokinins. Physiol Plant 101: 674-688

    Google Scholar 

  42. Symons GM and Murfet IC (1997) Inheritance and allelism tests on six further branching mutants in pea. Pisum Genet 29: 1-6

    Google Scholar 

  43. Symons GM, Murfet IC, Ross JJ, Sherriff LJ and Warkentin TD (1999) bushy, a dominant pea mutant characterised by short, thin stems, tiny leaves and a major reduction in apical dominance. Physiol Plant 107: 346-352

    Google Scholar 

  44. Thimann KV (1977) Hormone action in the whole life of plants. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press

    Google Scholar 

  45. White KP, Rifkin SA, Hurban P and Hogness DS (1999) Microarray analysis of Drosophila development during metamorphosis. Science 286: 2179-2184

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, 4072, Australia

    Christine A. Beveridge

Authors
  1. Christine A. Beveridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beveridge, C.A. Long-distance signalling and a mutational analysis of branching in pea. Plant Growth Regulation 32, 193–203 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010718020095

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010718020095

Search

Navigation