GROWTH ANALYSIS OF WILD-TYPE AND PHOTOMORPHOGENIC-MUTANT TOMATO PLANTS

Citation
Lhj. Kerckhoffs et al., GROWTH ANALYSIS OF WILD-TYPE AND PHOTOMORPHOGENIC-MUTANT TOMATO PLANTS, Physiologia Plantarum, 99(2), 1997, pp. 309-315
Citations number
35
Categorie Soggetti
Plant Sciences
Journal title
ISSN journal
00319317
Volume
99
Issue
2
Year of publication
1997
Pages
309 - 315
Database
ISI
SICI code
0031-9317(1997)99:2<309:GAOWAP>2.0.ZU;2-U
Abstract
A custom designed growth-measuring apparatus, controlled by a microcom puter has been used to study extension growth kinetics of wild-type an d photomorphogenic-mutant tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) plant s with. and without end-of-day far-red light (EODFR). The following ph otomorphogenic mutants were used. Far-red insensitive (fri(1)): defici ent in phytochrome A (phyA); temporarily red light-insensitive (tri(3) ): deficient in phytochrome B1 (phyB1), and their isogenic wild type ( WT) cv. MoneyMaker. aurea (au): deficient in phytochrome chromophore b iosynthesis; high-pigment-1 (hp-l): exhibiting exaggerated phytochrome responses, and their isogenic WT cv. Ailsa Craig. The stem elongation rate (SER) during a 24-h period of all the genotypes studied shows a similar pattern, having two dramatic transients, one shortly after the onset of the light period (a sharp decline in SER) and another shortl y after the start of the dark period (a sharp increase in SER). These transients are probably associated with water relations as a consequen ce of opening and closure of the stomata The fastest SER occurs during the dramatic oscillations early in the dark period. Between the genot ypes there are large quantitative differences in SER. All the genotype s tested exhibited a strong EODFR response, resulting in a relative pr omotion of SER during the first period after the start of EODFR and in the subsequent light and dark periods. These results indicate that ph yA, absent in the fri(1) mutant, does not play a major role in SER of light-grown tomato plants, whereas phyB1, absent in the tri(3) mutant, is partly responsible for the compact stature of WT plants. An additi onal phytochrome other than phyA and phyB1 must therefore be capable o f eliciting the EODFR response.