|
Plant Physiol, June 2000, Vol. 123, pp. 689-698
Auxin Inhibition of Decapitation-Induced Branching Is Dependent
on Graft-Transmissible Signals Regulated by Genes Rms1 and
Rms21
Christine A.
Beveridge,*
Gregory M.
Symons, and
Colin G.N.
Turnbull
Department of Botany, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia (C.A.B., C.G.N.T.); and School of
Plant Science, University of Tasmania, G.P.O. Box 252-55, Hobart,
Tasmania 7001, Australia (G.M.S.)
 |
ABSTRACT |
Decapitation-induced axillary bud outgrowth is a vital
mechanism whereby shoots are able to continue normal growth and
development. In many plants, including wild-type garden pea
(Pisum sativum L.), this process can be inhibited by
exogenous auxin. Using the ramosus (rms) increased
branching mutants of pea, we present evidence that this response to
auxin is dependent on graft-transmissible substance(s) regulated by the
genes Rms1 and Rms2. The response to
exogenous auxin is massively diminished in decapitated
rms1 and rms2 mutant plants. However,
basipetal auxin transport is not reduced in intact or decapitated
mutants. Grafting rms1 or rms2 shoots
onto wild-type rootstocks restored the auxin response, indicating that
Rms1 and Rms2 gene action in the
rootstock is sufficient to enable an auxin response in mutant shoots.
We conclude that Rms1 and Rms2 act in the
rootstock and shoot to control levels of mobile substance(s) that
interact with exogenous auxin in the inhibition of bud outgrowth after
decapitation. At least for rms1, the reduced auxin
response is unlikely to be due to an inability of auxin to decrease
xylem sap cytokinin content, as this is already low in intact
rms1 plants. Consequently, we have genetic evidence that
auxin action in decapitated plants depends on at least one novel
long-distance signal.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Apical dominance is generally
defined as the control exerted by a shoot apex over outgrowth of
lateral buds. However, widespread use of the term apical dominance has
led to an emphasis on the apical bud as the prime source of control and
underestimates the contribution that roots, stem, or leaves can make to
the regulation of shoot branching (Hosokawa et al., 1990 ). For example,
grafting studies with increased branching mutants from pea (Pisum
sativum; ramosus [rms]) and petunia
(decreased apical dominance; [dad]) demonstrate
the regulatory power of roots and stem. Wild-type (WT) roots can
inhibit branching in rms1 and rms2 pea shoots
(Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1997b ). In petunia, a small section of WT
interstock interrupting the stem at the base of dad1 plants
can completely revert the mutant shoot to WT (Napoli, 1996 ). Therefore,
we restrict apical dominance to situations where the apical bud is the
major source of regulatory control and prefer to use terms such as
branching and bud outgrowth (Napoli et al., 1999 ).
Early experiments on the control of branching employed decapitation as
a means to test the importance of the apical bud in controlling growth
of lateral buds. Results of studies modifying exogenous auxin supply to
decapitated plants (Thimann and Skoog, 1933 , 1934 ; Snow, 1937 ) led to
the hypothesis that auxin synthesized in the apical bud plays a role in
the inhibition of axillary buds.
There is some evidence that auxin inhibits lateral bud outgrowth via an
indirect mechanism. For example, Snow (1937) and Morris (1977) showed
that auxin supplied to one decapitated shoot of a plant with two or
more decapitated shoots can inhibit branching at most nodes of the
other shoot, even though radiolabeled auxin applied to one shoot does
not move acropetally into other shoot(s) (Morris, 1977 ). These results
indicate that auxin might act through another signal.
The promotion of lateral bud outgrowth by application of exogenous
cytokinin to intact plants led to the theory that the ratio of
cytokinin to auxin may control branching (Sachs and Thimann, 1964 ,
1967 ; Bangerth, 1994 ; Li et al., 1995 ). Decapitation experiments indicate that reduced auxin levels after decapitation may induce bud
outgrowth by causing a transient increase in cytokinin content (Bangerth, 1994 ; Li et al., 1995 ). Intact transgenic plants with modified hormone concentrations have also provided some support for the
auxin to cytokinin ratio hypothesis (Klee and Estelle, 1991 ). However,
changes in hormone concentrations in these transgenics often do not
correlate well with changes in bud outgrowth (for review, see Napoli et
al., 1999 ). For example, expression of 35S-ipt or
35S-iaaL genes in tobacco caused increased cytokinin or
decreased auxin, respectively, in juvenile plants, but were not
accompanied by increased bud release or subsequent lateral shoot
growth until the plants approached maturity (Medford et al., 1989 ;
Romano et al., 1991 ; C.P. Roma-no, personal communication).
Another approach, rather than manipulating hormone level through
bacterial transgenes, is to use auxin- or cytokinin-deficient or
overproducing mutants. To date, such mutants are very rare. One example
is amp1 from Arabidopsis which does have elevated cytokinin
levels (6-fold) and increased branching (Chaudhury et al., 1993 ).
However, the pleiotropic phenotype of the mutant precludes analysis of
branching in isolation.
The possibility that signals other than auxin and cytokinin may
contribute to the regulation of branching in plants has not yet
received major attention (for review, see Napoli et al., 1999 ). Mutants
screened for altered branching provide not only an opportunity to
investigate the role of cytokinin and auxin in the control of
branching, but also the potential to uncover novel or unpredicted genetic regulation of branching.
Axillary bud outgrowth occurs at numerous vegetative nodes of
rms mutants (Arumingtyas et al., 1992 ) but the mutations do not cause a highly pleiotropic phenotype. In contrast with predicted increases in cytokinin levels and/or decreased auxin content, rms1 is one of three nonallelic mutants that have reduced
root xylem sap cytokinin levels and normal or increased shoot auxin levels (Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1996 , 1997a , 1997b ; for review, see
Beveridge, 2000 ). Combined with results of grafting experiments, these
data indicate that Rms1 controls the level or transport of
graft-transmissible substance(s), other than cytokinin or auxin, that
influence branching (Beveridge et al., 1997b ). Branching in
rms2 plants is also caused by altered graft-transmissible
signaling, but, in comparison with WT plants, rms2 plants
have a slightly elevated xylem sap cytokinin concentration and up to a
5-fold increase in shoot auxin level compared with WT plants (Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1997b ). Using these two mutants, we have investigated auxin responses in decapitated pea to determine possible effects of the
graft-transmissible signals controlled by Rms1 and
Rms2 on auxin response. This report provides the first clear
evidence for genetic control of a mobile substance, other than
cytokinin, that interacts with auxin in the control of axillary bud outgrowth.
 |
RESULTS |
Auxin Transport
Basipetal transport of [3H]indole-3-acetic
acid (IAA) was measured in plants with six to nine fully expanded
leaves. In both intact and decapitated plants, radioactivity appeared
to move down the stem in a single basipetal wave (Figs.
1 and 2).
There were no significant differences among intact plants of different genotypes in the mean distances that the radioactivity was transported during the 18 h after application (Table
I). The radioactivity was transported
14% to 22% further in decapitated rms1 and rms2 mutant plants than in decapitated WT plants (significant at
P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively;
Table II). Eighteen to 19 h after
application of [3H]IAA, the mean wave maxima of
radioactivity transported in mutant and WT plants were between 9.7 and
11.1 cm in intact plants, and between 14.1 and 17.7 cm in decapitated
plants (Tables I and II). The percentage of radioactivity transported
from the apical bud of intact plants and from the application site of
decapitated plants ranged from 6% to 12% and 13% to 24%,
respectively, for the three genotypes. In absolute terms, the export of
[3H]IAA in rms1-1 and
rms2-2 plants was greater than in WT plants, up to 2-fold in
the case of rms1-1 (P < 0.01; Tables I and
II). HPLC analysis of the metabolism of radioactive compounds exported from the apical bud into the stem over an 18-h period after application of [3H]IAA, showed that greater than 92% of
radioactivity co-eluted with [3H]IAA (Fig.
3). The metabolic profiles were similar
among the three genotypes.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
Distribution of radioactivity in intact WT
(cv Parvus), rms1-1, and rms2-2 shoots 18 h
after supplying [3H]IAA (37 kBq per plant) to
the apical bud. The diagram on the far right shows the numbering of
stem segments. Each point is the value for a single segment and
each line is a single plant. Data shown are from segments 2 to 12. Data
are expressed as a percentage of the radioactivity recovered in the
segment with the greatest 3H content within the
basipetal wave. Absolute values are given in Table I; n = 5 or 6.
|
|

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2.
Distribution of radioactivity in
decapitated auxin-treated WT (cv Parvus), rms1-1, and
rms2-2 plants 19 h after supplying
[3H]IAA (8 kBq per plant) to the cut stem
surface. The diagram on the far right shows the numbering of stem
segments. Unlabeled auxin (5,000 mg/L in lanolin) was applied to the
stem stump before and after supplying the
[3H]IAA. Each point is the value for a single
segment and each line is a single plant. Data shown are from segments 3 to 12. Data are expressed as a percentage of the radioactivity
recovered in the segment with the greatest 3H
content within the basipetal wave. Absolute values are given in Table
II; n = 5 or 6.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I.
Auxin transport in intact WT (cv Parvus), rms1-1,
and rms2-2 plants
[3H]IAA (37 kBq; 37 pmol) was supplied to the apical bud
of each plant. Plants were harvested after 18 h. Stem segments
were numbered basipetally from the apical bud (Fig. 1). The distances
of wave maxima are relative to the apical bud. Data are means ± SE for the same plants as those represented in Figure 1.
n = 5 or 6.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II.
Auxin transport in decapitated WT (cv Parvus),
rms1-1, and rms2-2 plants
[3H]IAA (8 kBq; 8 pmol) was supplied to the cut stem
stump of plants 2 d after decapitation. Plants were harvested
19 h later. Unlabeled auxin (5,000 mg/L in lanolin) was applied to
the stem stump before and after supplying the [3H]IAA.
Stem segments were numbered basipetally from the stem stump (Fig. 2).
The distances of wave maxima are relative to the site of label
application. Data are means ± SE for the same plants
as those represented in Figure 2. n = 5 or 6.
|
|

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3.
HPLC radio-histograms of pooled stem segments 2 to 8 from shoots of individual WT (cv Parvus), rms1-1, and
rms2-2 plants fed with [3H]IAA, as
described in Figure 1. The retention time of IAA is shown by the bar.
Two additional replicates for each genotype yielded very similar
results.
|
|
Auxin Response in Decapitated Plants
WT (cv Parvus), rms1-1, and rms2-2 plants
with eight or nine leaves expanded were decapitated and were treated
daily with 0 (control), 500, 3,000, or 20,000 mg/L IAA in lanolin
applied to the decapitated stump. All plants had primary axillary buds removed at the time of decapitation. Release and subsequent growth of
secondary lateral buds of control plants occurred at all nodes of all
genotypes following decapitation (Fig.
4). At some nodes, especially further up
the stem, mean lateral shoot lengths were significantly greater in
rms1-1 and rms2-2 decapitated control plants than
in comparable WT plants. In WT plants, 500 mg/L IAA was sufficient to
inhibit bud outgrowth at nodes 2 and 8, and 3,000 mg/L IAA inhibited
bud growth at most nodes. However, neither of these auxin treatments
had a significant effect on bud growth in mutant plants. Even at 20,000 mg/L, IAA had only a small inhibitory effect on bud growth at any node
of rms1-1 and rms2-2 plants (Fig. 4). This
highest concentration of IAA caused about a 20-fold or greater
inhibition at upper nodes of WT plants, but less than a 2-fold
inhibition at similar nodes of rms1-1 and rms2-2
plants. Similar results were obtained from experiments using different mutant alleles (rms1-2 and rms2-1) in other
genetic backgrounds (data not shown; Figs.
5 and
6).

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4.
Effect of auxin application on
decapitation-induced branching in WT (cv Parvus), rms1-1,
and rms2-2 plants. Auxin was supplied to the cut
stem stump as IAA in lanolin (approximately 20 µL per plant), and was
replaced daily. n = 6 to 12. Data were collected 6 d after decapitation, and are plotted for each node as means ± SE on a logarithmic scale.
|
|

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5.
Effect of auxin application on
decapitation-induced branching in reciprocally grafted WT (cv Weitor)
and rms1-2 plants. Immediately after decapitation, auxin was
applied to the cut stem stump as IAA (2,000 mg/L) in lanolin
(approximately 20 µL per plant), and was replaced daily.
n = 10 to 13. Data were collected 7 d after
decapitation, and are plotted for each node as means ± SE. Notation is scion/rootstock.
|
|

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6.
Effect of auxin application on
decapitation-induced branching in reciprocally grafted WT (cv Torsdag)
and rms2-1 plants. Immediately after decapitation, auxin was
applied to the cut stem stump as IAA (2,000 mg/L) in lanolin
(approximately 20 µL per plant), and was replaced daily.
n = 10. Data were collected 7 d after
decapitation, and are plotted for each node as means ± SE. Notation is scion/rootstock.
|
|
All doses of exogenous IAA above 500 mg/L caused stem swelling in the
stump of all genotypes, perhaps due to auxin-induced ethylene
synthesis. Particularly at basal nodes, even the highest IAA treatment
(20,000 mg/L) did not reduce bud lengths of decapitated WT plants down
to that of non-decapitated controls (data not shown; lengths of
secondary buds of non-decapitated control plants were always less than
5 mm). Furthermore, the inhibition by exogenous auxin was often
associated with bud swelling that did not occur in inhibited buds of
intact WT plants.
Auxin Response in Decapitated Grafted Plants
WT (cv Weitor) and rms1-2 reciprocally grafted plants
were decapitated (and had primary buds removed) when they had about nine leaves expanded. Following this treatment, bud release and subsequent lateral shoot growth occurred at nodes above node 4 or 5 for
all graft combinations without exogenous auxin (Fig. 5). Except at the
uppermost node, where lateral lengths were similar for all
graft-combinations, lateral lengths above node 4 of rms1-2 self-grafted plants were significantly greater, typically 2-fold, than
those of other graft combinations. IAA applied at 2,000 mg/L to the
decapitated stump almost completely inhibited bud outgrowth in plants
of all graft combinations except for rms1-2 self-grafts (Fig. 5). Lateral lengths were significantly reduced only at node 8 of
rms1-2 self-grafted auxin-treated plants. The difference in
lateral bud lengths between auxin-treated rms1-2/WT
(scion/rootstock) and rms1-2/rms1-2 plants was
12- to 28-fold at the five uppermost nodes. Similar trends were
observed for rms1-1 and cv Parvus reciprocally grafted
plants (data not shown).
Decapitation (and primary bud removal) above node 9 or 10 of WT (cv
Torsdag) and rms2-1 reciprocally grafted plants caused lateral bud outgrowth predominantly at nodes 1 to 3 in all graft combinations (Fig. 6). With the exception of decapitated
WT/rms2-1 plants, where lateral lengths tended to be
shorter, the extent of lateral bud growth at nodes 1 to 3 was
relatively similar among plants of different graft combinations. Auxin
application (2,000 mg/L) reduced lateral bud growth at all nodes of all
genotypes, but was substantially less effective at inhibiting bud
release in rms2-1 self-grafted plants (Fig. 6). The
difference in lateral bud lengths between auxin-treated
rms2-1 shoots grafted to either WT or rms2-1
rootstocks was 3- to 6-fold at the three basal nodes and was
significant at all other nodes. With a different mutant allele,
rms2-2, and another background (cv Parvus), auxin again was
less effective at inhibiting bud outgrowth in mutant self-grafted plants than in plants of any other graft combination (data not shown).
 |
DISCUSSION |
Decapitated rms1 and rms2 mutant plants
clearly have a reduced response to exogenous auxin in comparison with
decapitated WT plants (Fig. 4). However, the reduced auxin response is
probably not a consequence of a direct lesion in auxin reception or
signal transduction because mutant shoots have a completely restored auxin response when grafted to WT rootstocks. We have determined that
exogenous auxin applied to the decapitated stump interacts with a
signal or signals controlled by genes Rms1 and
Rms2. These signal(s) may have been supplied by the shoot or
rootstock because branching was inhibited by auxin in decapitated
shoots of both graft combinations, mutant/WT and WT/mutant (Figs. 5 and
6).
The lateral shoot growth shown for plants of all genotypes (Figs. 4-6)
was from secondary axillary buds (Stafstrom and Sarup, 2000 ) that would
have remained inhibited throughout the life of equivalent intact
plants. Because intact rms mutants display extensive lateral
branching, whereas WTs do not (Beveridge et al., 1997b ), removal of the
primary axillary buds or shoots from every node at the time of
decapitation neatly provided an equalized opportunity for bud outgrowth
in mutant and WT shoots. This is demonstrated by the relatively similar
decapitation-induced bud outgrowth among control plants of all
genotypes and graft combinations. Auxin application enabled a test of
the ability of auxin to replace the shoot tip in maintaining bud
inhibition in WT and mutant shoots.
There are several reasons why the failure to respond to exogenous auxin
in decapitated rms1-1 and rms2-2 plants is
unlikely to be due to impaired polar auxin transport. Intact plants of both mutant genotypes exported at least as much exogenous
[3H]IAA in the polar transport stream as WT
plants, and this auxin moved at least as far over an 18-h period
(Tables I and II). The quantity of auxin applied to intact plants (37 pmol) was within normal physiological ranges (typically 60-1,700
pmol/g; Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1996 , 1997a ). The movement of
radiolabeled auxin (Figs. 1 and 2) was consistent with the expected
characteristics of polar auxin transport, namely a single basipetal
wave of radioactivity. The distance traveled by the wave maxima was
equivalent to a mean linear velocity of about 5 to 9 mm
h 1, similar to that reported previously for pea
(Johnson and Morris, 1989 ; Cambridge and Morris, 1996 ). Furthermore, a
polar auxin transport inhibitor, triiodobenzoic acid, applied in
a ring around the stem below the apical bud, inhibited the downward
movement of [3H]IAA (data not shown; Johnson
and Morris, 1989 ). As demonstrated by Morris and Johnson (1990) ,
decapitation can result in loss of polar auxin transport, but this loss
can be prevented by supplying auxin to the cut stump. It is important
to note that the polar transport system was still functional in
decapitated auxin-treated plants of mutant and WT genotypes (Fig. 2).
[3H]IAA moved slightly further down the stem in
decapitated than in intact plants over a similar time interval. Perhaps
transfer into the polar transport stream from the cut stump of
decapitated plants was more rapid than following application to the
intact apical bud. In all genotypes, most of the radioactivity in the polar transport wave was recovered as unmetabolized IAA (Fig. 3), as
previously reported by Morris and Johnson (1990) . In contrast, a large
proportion of the radioactivity remaining near the fed portion (Fig. 1)
corresponded to metabolized [3H]IAA (data not shown).
It is interesting to note that, particularly for decapitated plants,
slightly more auxin may have moved slightly further in rms1
and rms2 plants than in WT plants (Fig. 2; Tables I and II).
Mutant rms1 and rms2 shoot tips also have
slightly higher endogenous auxin levels than comparable WT shoot tips
(Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1997b ). Consequently, in comparison with WT
plants, it is possible that a greater quantity of auxin is transported from rms1 and rms2 shoot tips through the
basipetal transport stream over a given period.
Decapitation in bean and pea can lead to transient increases in
cytokinin levels in the xylem sap or shoot, and exogenous auxin
application can partially suppress these increases (Bangerth, 1994 ; Li
et al., 1995 ). However, our studies have shown that Rms1 regulates a rootstock-derived signal other than cytokinin (Beveridge et
al., 1997b ) that interacts with auxin in decapitated plants. Branching
occurs in intact rms1 shoots, even though the root xylem sap
already has considerably less zeatin riboside (the major cytokinin in
pea xylem sap) than in WT sap (Beveridge et al., 1997b ). Other isoprenoid cytokinins are also depleted in root xylem sap of
rms1 plants (S.E. Morris, C.A. Beveridge, and C.G.N.
Turnbull, unpublished data). Consequently, it is unlikely that
Rms1 in the rootstock acts to inhibit bud release by
enabling exogenous auxin to reduce xylem sap cytokinin levels even
further. Interestingly, rms3 and rms4 shoots also
have a reduced response to exogenous auxin (Beveridge, 2000 ). Like
rms1, these mutants already have depleted xylem sap cytokinin levels and normal or elevated shoot auxin levels and transport (Beveridge et al., 1996 , 1997a ; Beveridge, 2000 ). It is not
yet possible to ascertain whether Rms3 and Rms4
directly affect auxin perception or signal transduction, or whether
they control responses to the signals regulated by Rms1 and
Rms2.
It is not yet clear whether regulation of branching involves the same
signals and processes in decapitated plants as in intact plants
(Rubinstein and Nagao, 1976 ; Napoli et al., 1999 ). Decapitation-induced branching is a vital recovery mechanism, whereas branching in intact
plants is under variable environmental and ontogenetic control.
Furthermore, as suggested by Trewavas (1986) , a treatment as disruptive
as shoot decapitation is likely to influence subsequent development in
more ways than simply through loss of an auxin supply (Husain and
Linck, 1966 ; McIntyre and Cessna, 1990 ; Stahlberg and Cosgrove, 1992 ;
Sherriff et al., 1994 ). Unlike intact WT plants, where complete
bud inhibition is common (i.e. buds remaining 1 mm or less in length),
basal buds of decapitated WT plants treated with 20,000 mg/L IAA grew
to around 10 mm in length (Fig. 4). This discrepancy may reflect
differences in patterns of auxin supply between exogenous and
endogenous sources. In decapitated plants, an intermittent exogenous
supply was generated by daily replacement of the auxin-lanolin mixture,
whereas intact plants presumably have a steady basipetal auxin stream.
In some tissues, however, the 20,000 mg/L dose of auxin is likely to
have caused auxin levels in WT plants to exceed those normally present
in the tissue because the treatment caused phenotypic effects, such as
stem swelling, that are associated with high auxin levels but that are
not normally associated with bud inhibition in intact WT plants. In
addition, attempts to correlate auxin delivery with bud outgrowth have
indicated that a higher concentration of auxin is required to inhibit
bud outgrowth in decapitated plants than in intact or largely intact
plants (Kotov, 1996 ). However, it is worth considering the question of
whether either of the signals regulated by Rms1 and
Rms2 may be produced at the shoot tip and hence, like auxin,
are affected by decapitation.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that the effectiveness of exogenous
auxin in inhibiting branching is massively diminished in decapitated
rms1 and rms2 mutant plants (Fig. 5), and this finding is consistent across four alleles at two loci in three different genetic backgrounds. However, the response to auxin in
rms1 and rms2 shoots is fully restored by
grafting to WT rootstocks (Figs. 5 and 6). Thus, by separating the
location of the gene from its final site of action, we have evidence
that Rms1 and Rms2 control one or more mobile
signals that interact with auxin in the inhibition of bud outgrowth.
The nature of these signals is not yet known, but at least for
Rms1, cytokinin is an unlikely candidate.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plant Materials
The branching lines used have been described in detail
(Arumingtyas et al., 1992 ; Beveridge et al., 1994 , 1997b , and refs. therein). Lines WL5237 (rms1-1) and WL5951
(rms2-2) are derived from cv Parvus, line WL5147
(rms1-2) from cv Weitor, and line K524
(rms2-1) from cv Torsdag, respectively. All lines are
tall and photoperiod responsive. The mutations are all recessive and were induced by S. Blixt (Weibullsholm Plant Breeding Institute, Landskrona, Sweden) and K. Sidorova (Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Novosibirsk, Russia) using irradiation or ethyl
methane sulfonate.
Growth Conditions and Bud Growth Measurements
Plants were grown under greenhouse conditions with the natural
daylength (9-12 h) extended to 16 or 18 h with weak incandescent lighting. The growth medium was as described in Beveridge et al. (1996)
or was a mixture of peat:sand:perlite (1:1:1, v/v). Nodes were numbered
acropetally with the first scale leaf as node 1. A leaf was considered
expanded when the leaflets and stipules were completely unfolded even
though further expansion growth followed. Lateral shoot lengths were
measured from the leaf axil at the main stem to the estimated position
of the axillary shoot apex, to an accuracy of 1 mm. Epicotyl wedge
grafts were performed at d 6 or 7 as described by Beveridge et al.
(1994) . Genotypes of graft combinations are given as
scion/rootstock.
Auxin Transport
Auxin transport was measured in plants supplied with
[5(n)-3H]IAA; specific activity 1015 Bq
mol 1 (Amersham International, Buckinghamshire, UK). For
intact plants with six to seven leaves expanded, 37 kBq (37 pmol) of
[3H]IAA in 5 µL of ethanol was applied to the apical
bud inside the stipules of the leaf two nodes above the highest
expanded leaf.
Eighteen hours after treatment with [3H]IAA,
internode lengths were measured and the stem was divided into sections
(Fig. 1) that were then placed into liquid nitrogen. Sections included the apical bud and the oldest unexpanded leaf, the node at the highest
expanded leaf, the two lower nodes, and the internodes adjacent
to these nodes (Fig. 1). Internodes were divided into two sections of
equal length and leaves and stipules were removed from all but the fed
portions. Each section was ground individually under liquid nitrogen,
suspended in 7 mL of methanol:water (4:1, v/v), then shaken gently at
4°C for at least 18 h to facilitate extraction. Aliquots were
mixed with liquid scintillation cocktail and analyzed in a liquid
scintillation counter. As the region of stem containing the basipetal
[3H]IAA wave maximum may have fallen equally or
disproportionately within two adjacent stem sections, the exact
distance of the wave maximum from the apical bud was interpolated for
each plant from adjacent data points (Table I).
Similar experiments were conducted with decapitated plants. The primary
bud at each node was removed prior to decapitation. Plants were
decapitated below the highest expanded leaf (nodes 7-9) and pretreated
daily with IAA (5,000 mg/L in lanolin) applied to the cut shoot stump
for 2 d prior to supplying [3H]IAA (8.8 kBq, 8.8 pmol per plant). Label was applied to the stem stump in 3 µL of
ethanol after cutting off an additional 1 cm of stem to remove the
unlabeled auxin and lanolin. Ten minutes after adding the labeled
auxin, unlabeled auxin in lanolin was again placed on the stump. Plants
were harvested after 19 h and extracted essentially as described
above for intact plants.
To determine the extent of metabolism of the [3H]IAA
transported from the apical bud, [3H]IAA was applied to
intact plants as above. After 18 h, the fed portion (apical bud)
was discarded, and the stem sections without stipules or leaves were
harvested, quickly frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at 20°C.
Extracts were prepared as above, except that the extraction volume was
10 mL and contained 0.25 mg mL 1 butylated hydroxytoluene.
Extracts were fractionated by reversed phase HPLC as described by Hasan
et al. (1994) . Solvents were methanol and distilled water containing
0.4% (v/v) acetic acid; the solvent program ran from 20% to
55% (v/v) methanol over 40 min and then from 55% to 100% (v/v)
methanol over 5 min at a flow rate of 2 mL min 1. The
retention time of [3H]IAA was between 17 and 18 min. The
3H content of individual 1-min HPLC fractions was analyzed
by scintillation counting.
Auxin Response in Decapitated Ungrafted and Grafted
Plants
The response of axillary buds to exogenous auxin was
tested following removal of the apical bud. To avoid complications due to differing degrees of lateral bud outgrowth in WT and mutant plants
prior to auxin application, the primary lateral bud was removed from
all nodes of all plants prior to decapitation. Decapitation of these
plants resulted in significant secondary lateral bud release in all
genotypes, including WT. These secondary lateral buds are adjacent to
the primary bud in the leaf axil of the main stem. Before decapitation,
secondary buds at upper nodes are usually microscopic. At nodes
1 and 2, secondary buds may be up to 1 mm long. All such buds,
including those of mutant plants, would have remained inhibited if the
plants were left completely intact. After dissolving IAA in ethanol,
various concentrations were prepared as mixtures with lanolin:ethanol
(92:8). Approximately 20 µL of the auxin-lanolin mixture was applied
daily to the decapitated internode (stump) above the highest expanded leaf.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful for helpful comments from Drs. John Ross and Ian
Dodd and we thank Kathy Crew and John Finlay for technical assistance.
We also thank J. Hendrikz for advice on statistical analysis and
calculations for the auxin transport experiments.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Received November 10, 1999; accepted February 19, 2000.
1
This work was supported by grants from the
Australian Research Council and by a University of Queensland Enabling
Grant. G.M.S. was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award.
*
Corresponding author; e-mail c.beveridge{at}botany.uq.edu.au; fax
61-7-3365-1699.
 |
LITERATURE CITED |
-
Arumingtyas EL, Floyd RS, Gregory MJ, Murfet IC
(1992)
Branching in Pisum: inheritance and allelism tests with 17 ramosus mutants.
Pisum Genet
24: 17-31
-
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
-
Beveridge CA (2000) Long-distance signalling and a mutational
analysis of branching in pea. Plant Growth Regul (in press)
-
Beveridge CA, Murfet IC, Kerhoas L, Sotta B, Miginiac E, Rameau C
(1997a)
The shoot controls zeatin riboside export from pea roots: evidence from the branching mutant rms4.
Plant J
11: 339-345
[CrossRef]
-
Beveridge CA, Ross JJ, Murfet IC
(1994)
Branching mutant rms-2 in Pisum sativum: grafting studies and endogenous indole-3-acetic acid levels.
Plant Physiol
104: 953-959
[Abstract]
-
Beveridge CA, Ross JJ, Murfet IC
(1996)
Branching in pea: action of genes Rms3 and Rms4.
Plant Physiol
110: 859-865
[Abstract]
-
Beveridge CA, Symons GM, Murfet IC, Ross JJ, Rameau C
(1997b)
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
15: 1251-1258
-
Cambridge AP, Morris DA
(1996)
Transfer of exogenous auxin from the phloem to the polar auxin transport pathway in pea (Pisum sativum L.).
Planta
199: 583-588
-
Chaudhury AM, Letham S, Craig S, Dennis ES
(1993)
amp1: a mutant with high cytokinin levels and altered embryonic pattern, faster vegetative growth, constitutive photomorphogenesis and precocious flowering.
Plant J
4: 907-916
[CrossRef]
-
Hasan O, Ridoutt BG, Ross JJ, Davies NW, Reid JB
(1994)
Identification and quantification of endogenous gibberellins in apical buds and the cambial region of Eucalyptus.
Physiol Plant
90: 475-480
[CrossRef]
-
Hosokawa Z, Shi L, Prasad TK, Cline MG
(1990)
Apical dominance control in Ipomoea nil: the influence of the shoot apex, leaves and stem.
Ann Bot
65: 547-556
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Husain SM, Linck AJ
(1966)
Relationship of apical dominance to the nutrient accumulation pattern in Pisum sativum var.
Alaska. Physiol Plant
19: 992-1010
-
Johnson CF, Morris DA
(1989)
Applicability of the chemiosmotic polar diffusion theory to the transport of indol-3yl-acetic acid in the intact pea (Pisum sativum L.)
Planta
178: 242-248
-
Klee H, Estelle M
(1991)
Molecular approaches to plant hormone biology.
Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol
42: 529-551
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
-
Kotov AA
(1996)
Indole-3-acetic acid transport in apical dominance: a quantitative approach: influence of endogenous and exogenous IAA apical source on inhibitory power of IAA transport.
Plant Growth Regul
19: 1-5
-
Li CJ, Guevara E, Gerrera J, 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
[CrossRef]
-
McIntyre GI, Cessna AJ
(1990)
Apical dominance in Phaseolus vulgaris: effect of nitrogen supply.
Can J Bot
69: 1337-1343
-
Medford JI, Horgan R, El-Sawi Z, Klee HJ
(1989)
Alterations of endogenous cytokinins in transgenic plants using a chimeric isopentenyl transferase gene.
Plant Cell
1: 403-413
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Morris DA
(1977)
Transport of exogenous auxin in two-branched dwarf pea seedlings (Pisum sativum L.): some implications for polarity and apical dominance.
Planta
136: 91-96
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
-
Morris DA, Johnson CF
(1990)
The role of auxin efflux carriers in the reversible loss of polar auxin transport in the pea (Pisum sativum L.) stem.
Planta
181: 117-124
-
Napoli CA
(1996)
Highly branched phenotype of the petunia dad1-1 mutant is reversed by grafting.
Plant Physiol
111: 27-37
[Abstract]
-
Napoli CA, Beveridge CA, Snowden KC
(1999)
Re-evaluating concepts of apical dominance and the control of axillary bud outgrowth.
Curr Topics Dev Biol
44: 127-169
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Romano CP, Hein MB, Klee HJ
(1991)
Inactivation of auxin in tobacco transformed with the indoleacetic acid-lysine synthetase gene of Pseudomonas savastanoi.
Genes Dev
5: 438-446
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Rubinstein B, Nagao MA
(1976)
Lateral bud outgrowth and its control by the apex.
Bot Rev
42: 83-113
-
Sachs T, Thimann KV
(1964)
Release of lateral buds from apical dominance.
Nature
201: 939-940
[CrossRef]
-
Sachs T, Thimann KV
(1967)
The role of auxins and cytokinins in the release of buds from apical dominance.
Amer J Bot
45: 136-144
-
Sherriff LJ, McKay M, Ross JJ, Reid JB, Willis CL
(1994)
Decapitation reduces the metabolism of gibberellin A20 to A1 in Pisum sativum L., decreasing the Le/le difference.
Plant Physiol
104: 227-280
[Abstract]
-
Snow R
(1937)
On the nature of correlative inhibition.
New Phytol
36: 283-300
[CrossRef]
-
Stafstrom JP, Sarup VB
(2000)
Development of supernumerary buds from the axillary meristem of pea Pisum sativum (Fabaceae).
Aust J Bot
48: 271-278
[CrossRef]
-
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ
(1992)
Rapid alterations in growth rate and electrical potentials upon stem excision in pea seedlings.
Planta
187: 523-531
[Medline]
-
Thimann KV, Skoog F
(1933)
Studies on the growth hormone in plants: III. The inhibiting action of growth substances on bud development.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
19: 714-716
[Free Full Text]
-
Thimann KV, Skoog F
(1934)
On the inhibition of bud development and other functions of growth substances in Vicia faba.
Proc Roy Soc London Ser B
114: 317-339
-
Trewavas A
(1986)
Understanding the control of plant development and the role of growth substances.
Aust J Plant Physiol
13: 447-457
© 2000 American Society of Plant Physiologists
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. A. Beveridge, E. A. Dun, and C. Rameau
Pea Has Its Tendrils in Branching Discoveries Spanning a Century from Auxin to Strigolactones
Plant Physiology,
November 1, 2009;
151(3):
985 - 990.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Lin, R. Wang, Q. Qian, M. Yan, X. Meng, Z. Fu, C. Yan, B. Jiang, Z. Su, J. Li, et al.
DWARF27, an Iron-Containing Protein Required for the Biosynthesis of Strigolactones, Regulates Rice Tiller Bud Outgrowth
PLANT CELL,
May 1, 2009;
21(5):
1512 - 1525.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. B. Brewer, E. A. Dun, B. J. Ferguson, C. Rameau, and C. A. Beveridge
Strigolactone Acts Downstream of Auxin to Regulate Bud Outgrowth in Pea and Arabidopsis
Plant Physiology,
May 1, 2009;
150(1):
482 - 493.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. J. Ferguson and C. A. Beveridge
Roles for Auxin, Cytokinin, and Strigolactone in Regulating Shoot Branching
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2009;
149(4):
1929 - 1944.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. I. Cazzonelli, A. J. Cuttriss, S. B. Cossetto, W. Pye, P. Crisp, J. Whelan, E. J. Finnegan, C. Turnbull, and B. J. Pogson
Regulation of Carotenoid Composition and Shoot Branching in Arabidopsis by a Chromatin Modifying Histone Methyltransferase, SDG8
PLANT CELL,
January 1, 2009;
21(1):
39 - 53.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
I. C. Dodd, B. J. Ferguson, and C. A. Beveridge
Apical Wilting and Petiole Xylem Vessel Diameter of the rms2 Branching Mutant of Pea are Shoot Controlled and Independent of a Long-Distance Signal Regulating Branching
Plant Cell Physiol.,
May 1, 2008;
49(5):
791 - 800.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Ongaro and O. Leyser
Hormonal control of shoot branching
J. Exp. Bot.,
January 1, 2008;
59(1):
67 - 74.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. H. Kebrom and T. P. Brutnell
The molecular analysis of the shade avoidance syndrome in the grasses has begun
J. Exp. Bot.,
October 5, 2007;
(2007)
erm205v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Foo, S. E. Morris, K. Parmenter, N. Young, H. Wang, A. Jones, C. Rameau, C. G.N. Turnbull, and C. A. Beveridge
Feedback Regulation of Xylem Cytokinin Content Is Conserved in Pea and Arabidopsis
Plant Physiology,
March 1, 2007;
143(3):
1418 - 1428.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. A. Aguilar-Martinez, C. Poza-Carrion, and P. Cubas
Arabidopsis BRANCHED1 Acts as an Integrator of Branching Signals within Axillary Buds
PLANT CELL,
February 1, 2007;
19(2):
458 - 472.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. D. G. ALVAREZ, R. J. MEEKING, and D. W. R. WHITE
The Origin, Initiation and Development of Axillary Shoot Meristems in Lotus japonicus
Ann. Bot.,
November 1, 2006;
98(5):
953 - 963.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. A. Dun, B. J. Ferguson, and C. A. Beveridge
Apical dominance and shoot branching. Divergent opinions or divergent mechanisms?
Plant Physiology,
November 1, 2006;
142(3):
812 - 819.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. E. van Noorden, J. J. Ross, J. B. Reid, B. G. Rolfe, and U. Mathesius
Defective Long-Distance Auxin Transport Regulation in the Medicago truncatula super numeric nodules Mutant
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2006;
140(4):
1494 - 1506.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. E. Morris, M. C.H. Cox, J. J. Ross, S. Krisantini, and C. A. Beveridge
Auxin Dynamics after Decapitation Are Not Correlated with the Initial Growth of Axillary Buds
Plant Physiology,
July 1, 2005;
138(3):
1665 - 1672.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. C. Snowden, A. J. Simkin, B. J. Janssen, K. R. Templeton, H. M. Loucas, J. L. Simons, S. Karunairetnam, A. P. Gleave, D. G. Clark, and H. J. Klee
The Decreased apical dominance1/Petunia hybrida CAROTENOID CLEAVAGE DIOXYGENASE8 Gene Affects Branch Production and Plays a Role in Leaf Senescence, Root Growth, and Flower Development
PLANT CELL,
March 1, 2005;
17(3):
746 - 759.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Foo, E. Bullier, M. Goussot, F. Foucher, C. Rameau, and C. A. Beveridge
The Branching Gene RAMOSUS1 Mediates Interactions among Two Novel Signals and Auxin in Pea
PLANT CELL,
February 1, 2005;
17(2):
464 - 474.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. J. Blakeslee, A. Bandyopadhyay, W. A. Peer, S. N. Makam, and A. S. Murphy
Relocalization of the PIN1 Auxin Efflux Facilitator Plays a Role in Phototropic Responses
Plant Physiology,
January 1, 2004;
134(1):
28 - 31.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. H. Schwartz, X. Qin, and J. A.D. Zeevaart
Elucidation of the Indirect Pathway of Abscisic Acid Biosynthesis by Mutants, Genes, and Enzymes
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2003;
131(4):
1591 - 1601.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. M. Rosin, J. K. Hart, H. Van Onckelen, and D. J. Hannapel
Suppression of a Vegetative MADS Box Gene of Potato Activates Axillary Meristem Development
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2003;
131(4):
1613 - 1622.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. A. Beveridge, J. L. Weller, S. R. Singer, and J. M.I. Hofer
Axillary Meristem Development. Budding Relationships between Networks Controlling Flowering, Branching, and Photoperiod Responsiveness
Plant Physiology,
March 1, 2003;
131(3):
927 - 934.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Booker, S. Chatfield, and O. Leyser
Auxin Acts in Xylem-Associated or Medullary Cells to Mediate Apical Dominance
PLANT CELL,
February 1, 2003;
15(2):
495 - 507.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. G. CLINE and K. DONG-IL
A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Auxin and Cytokinin in Sylleptic Branching of Three Hybrid Poplar Clones Exhibiting Contrasting Degrees of Sylleptic Branching
Ann. Bot.,
September 1, 2002;
90(3):
417 - 421.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Stirnberg, K. van de Sande, and H. M. O. Leyser
MAX1 and MAX2 control shoot lateral branching in Arabidopsis
Development,
January 3, 2002;
129(5):
1131 - 1141.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Shimizu-Sato and H. Mori
Control of Outgrowth and Dormancy in Axillary Buds
Plant Physiology,
December 1, 2001;
127(4):
1405 - 1413.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. E. Morris, C. G.N. Turnbull, I. C. Murfet, and C. A. Beveridge
Mutational Analysis of Branching in Pea. Evidence That Rms1 and Rms5 Regulate the Same Novel Signal
Plant Physiology,
July 1, 2001;
126(3):
1205 - 1213.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Foo, C. G.N. Turnbull, and C. A. Beveridge
Long-Distance Signaling and the Control of Branching in the rms1 Mutant of Pea
Plant Physiology,
May 1, 2001;
126(1):
203 - 209.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. P. Horvath, W. S. Chao, and J. V. Anderson
Molecular Analysis of Signals Controlling Dormancy and Growth in Underground Adventitious Buds of Leafy Spurge
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2002;
128(4):
1439 - 1446.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|