This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Melan, M. A. Articles by Cosgrove, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Melan, M. A. Articles by Cosgrove, D. J. Agricola Articles by Melan, M. A. Articles by Cosgrove, D. J.

Development and Growth Regulation

Evidence Against the Involvement of Ionically Bound Cell Wall Proteins in Pea Epicotyl Growth ¹

Department of Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, 202 Buckhout Laboratory, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802

Ionically bound cell wall proteins were extracted from 7 day old etiolated pea (Pisum sativum L. cv Alaska) epicotyls with 3 molar LiCl. Polyclonal antiserum was raised in rabbits against the cell wall proteins. Growth assays showed that treatment of growing region segments (5-7 millimeters) of peas with either dialyzed serum, serum globulin fraction, affinity purified immunoglobulin, or papain-cleaved antibody fragments had no effect on growth. Immunofluorescence microscopy confirmed antibody binding to cell walls and penetration of the antibodies into the tissues. Western blot analysis, immunoassay results, and affinity chromatography utilizing Sepharose-bound antibodies confirmed recognition of the protein preparation by the antibodies. Experiments employing in vitro extension as a screening measure indicated no effect upon extension by antibodies, by 50 millimolar LiCl perfusion of the apoplast or by 3 molar LiCl extraction. Addition of cell wall protein to protease pretreated segments did not restore extension nor did addition of cell wall protein to untreated segments increase extension. It is concluded that, although evidence suggests that protein is responsible for the process of extension, the class(es) of proteins which are extracted from pea cell walls with 3 molar LiCl are probably not involved in this process.

¹ Supported by National Science Foundation Grant DMB-8351030 and by the McKnight Foundation.