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 HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Web of Science (19) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Warpeha, K. M. F. Articles by Kaufman, L. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Warpeha, K. M. F. Articles by Kaufman, L. S. Agricola Articles by Warpeha, K. M. F. Articles by Kaufman, L. S.

Development and Growth Regulation

Two Distinct Blue-Light Responses Regulate Epicotyl Elongation in Pea ¹

Department of Biological Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60680, Laboratory for Molecular Biology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60680

Blue light induces a long-term suppression of epicotyl elongation in red-light-grown pea (Pisum sativum L.) seedlings. The fluence-response characteristics are bell-shaped, indicating the possibility of two different blue-light responses: a lower fluence response causing suppression and a higher fluence response alleviating the suppression. To determine if two responses are in effect, we have grown pea seedlings under dark conditions hoping to eliminate one or the other response. Under these growth conditions, only the lower fluence portion of the response (suppression of elongation) is apparent. The kinetics of suppression are similar to those observed for the lower fluence response of red-light-grown seedlings. The response to blue light in the dark-grown seedlings is not due to the excitation of phytochrome because a pulse of far-red light large enough to negate phytochrome-induced suppression has no effect on the blue-light-induced suppression. Furthermore, treatment of the dark-grown seedlings with red light immediately prior to treatment with high fluence blue light does not elicit the higher fluence response, indicating that the role of red light in the blue high fluence response is to allow the plant to achieve a specific developmental state in which it is competent to respond to the higher fluences of blue light.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. M. Warpeha, S. S. Lateef, Y. Lapik, M. Anderson, B.-S. Lee, and L. S. Kaufman G-Protein-Coupled Receptor 1, G-Protein G{alpha}-Subunit 1, and Prephenate Dehydratase 1 Are Required for Blue Light-Induced Production of Phenylalanine in Etiolated Arabidopsis Plant Physiology, March 1, 2006; 140(3): 844 - 855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Long and M. Iino Light-Dependent Osmoregulation in Pea Stem Protoplasts. Photoreceptors, Tissue Specificity, Ion Relationships, and Physiological Implications Plant Physiology, April 1, 2001; 125(4): 1854 - 1869. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. B. Anderson, K. Folta, K. M. Warpeha, J. Gibbons, J. Gao, and L. S. Kaufman Blue Light–Directed Destabilization of the Pea Lhcb1*4 Transcript Depends on Sequences within the 5' Untranslated Region PLANT CELL, August 1, 1999; 11(8): 1579 - 1590. [Abstract] [Full Text]