|
|
||||||||
|
Plant Physiol, December 2001, Vol. 127, pp. 1533-1538
UPDATE ON LEAF DEVELOPMENT
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In higher plants, the shoot apical
meristem generates the radially symmetrical stem and also produces, in
succession, bilaterally symmetrical lateral organs called
leaves. Photosynthetic light capture occurs in leaves. In
addition, leaves may also function to perceive and transmit
environmental signals to other plant organs. Leaves come in two basic
forms, simple (blade or lamina not subdivided into multiple units or
leaflets) and compound (lamina subdivided into leaflets). The two leaf
types can be found in related species of the same genus. In addition,
certain heterophyllic aquatic species can switch from making simple
leaves to compound leaves on transfer from terrestrial to aquatic
environments (Allsopp, 1965
). Compound leaves may confer an advantage
in air exchange (Gurevitch and Schuepp, 1990
) and reduce herbivore
damage (Brown and Lawton, 1991
). Given the wide ranging implications of
variation in leaf form, an interesting question is whether the leaf in
ancestral angiosperms (and other groups) was simple or compound.
| |
MORPHOLOGY OF COMPOUND LEAVES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Compound leaves consist of a petiole and several leaflets, each of
which may or may not have a short petiolule. Leaflets may be arranged
along a main axis, the rachis (pinnate), or emerge from one point at
the distal end of the petiole (palmate). Most compound leaves are
determinate, bilaterally symmetrical structures and usually produce a
defined number of leaflets. In dicots, compound leaves are very similar
to simple leaves in initiation and growth patterns. Leaflets can be
produced by one of three routes: acropetal, basipetal, or divergent
(Gifford and Foster, 1988
). In ferns and angiosperms, the marginal
meristem dilates shortly after primordial initiation and fractionates
to produces pinnae (Hagemann, 1984
). As pinnae are generated, marginal
meristem thickness declines until the last period of growth leads to
pinnae lamina formation. In the palmately compound leaf in the monocot
Arisaema spp., a member of the Araceae, the apex of the
primordium becomes hood like and plicately folded at right angles to
its surface (Peraisamy and Muruganathan, 1986
). Each fold gives rise to
a leaflet by differential growth of different parts of the fold. This
is in marked contrast to palm leaf development. Kaplan et al. (1982a
, 1982b
) have shown that pleated folds appear on the palm leaf
primordium. The folds are then dissected into individual laminas by
abscission of a layer of cells from one surface of the pleated
primordium. Thus, palms and aroids (both monocots) have very different
compound leaf development. Certain tropical plants in the family
Meliaceae have pinnately compound leaves in which leaflet initiation at the apex continues for years (Fisher and Rutishauser, 1990
). Some fern
fronds show almost indefinite growth from an apical zone of mitotic
activity, and all ferns have acropetal leaflet initiation (Steeves and
Sussex, 1989
).
| |
HOMOLOGY OF COMPOUND LEAVES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Morphological Analyses
There is some discussion in the literature regarding the nature of
highly dissected versus compound leaves. Leaves bearing distinct
leaflets are termed compound leaves by some researchers (Steeves and
Sussex, 1989
; Bell, 1991
). Others have preferred to treat leaves as a
continuum between simple and highly dissected (Kaplan, 1975
). The dicot
simple leaf has been suggested to be derived phylogenetically from a
pinnately compound leaf, with smooth-edged leaf blades arising by
suppression of marginal meristem fractionation (Hagemann, 1984
). An
opposing view suggests that the simple leaf is the ancestral form,
which is maintained in ontogeny, and that leaflets in compound leaves
develop by similar mechanisms, as do lobes in a simple leaf (Eames,
1961
). The ontogenetic relationship of the dicot compound leaf to the
simple leaf is unclear (Merrill, 1986a
, 1986b
). The true homologies of
compound leaves have been a matter of debate. They have been considered true lateral organs with homologies to simple leaves (Kaplan, 1975
;
Hagemann, 1984
) or structures that are intermediate between leaves and
shoots (Fisher and Rutishauser, 1990
; Lacroix and Sattler, 1994
).
Phylogenetic Analyses
The primary photosynthetic structures of the earliest vascular
plants were branched axes, and the first identifiable
leaves in the fossil record are believed to represent modified
three-dimensional lateral branch systems (Zimmerman, 1952
). Extant
vascular plants exhibit an enormous range of leaf forms broadly grouped
into two categories, compound and simple leaves. The evolutionary
transition from lateral, flattened branch systems to compound leaves,
now identified as distinct organs, is represented in the extant groups, ferns and cycads, in which it occurred independently (Stewart and
Rothwell, 1993
; Kenrick and Crane, 1997
; Doyle, 1998
). In other words,
compound leaves of vascular plants are not all homologous. Do different
mechanisms underlie their development? Many angiosperms also produce
compound leaves, and the same question may be asked for this group.
Fossil evidence suggests that the ancestral angiosperm leaf type was
simple (Doyle, 1998
). The scattered occurrence of compound/complex leaves in families such as Solanaceae and Asteraceae, on the one hand,
and Ranunculaceae, on the other, points to several independent origins
of this feature in the dicots. Preliminary results from phylogenetic
analyses using recent hypotheses of angiosperm relationships support
this idea (Goliber et al., 1998
). The occurrence of multiple origins of
compound/complex leaves in angiosperms permits tests of hypotheses
about their mode(s) of origin. For instance, it has been suggested that
the evolution of the compound/complex leaf in dicots is the result of
homeosis
expression of "leaf" programs within the shoot-like
compound/complex leaf (Lacroix and Sattler, 1994
; Rutishauser, 1995
).
These leaves might represent reversals to an ancestral condition such
as that in cycads, or they might be the result of mechanistic
innovations. On the other hand, deeply lobed or compound leaves could
have arisen from simple leaves by a suppression of the blade expansion
program in certain regions of the leaf primordium. These hypotheses are
not mutually exclusive.
These analyses suggest that compound leaves are derived from either elaborated simple leaves or reduced branch systems. With the identification of genes that play a role in morphogenesis, it is now possible to propose hypotheses for the mechanistic bases of compound leaf development and test them using developmental and evolutionary tools.
Genes Regulating Morphogenesis in Vascular Plants
We expect that the basic set of components involved in the regulation of leaf morphology would include key regulatory genes, such as KNOX, LEAFY, and PHANTASTICA.
KNOTTED1-like class I homeobox genes (KNOXI
genes) have a fundamental role in shoot meristem formation and axis
development. Homeobox proteins are fundamental to multicellular
eukaryotic development and have been characterized from
major eukaryotic groupings (Bürglin, 1994
). Plant
homeobox genes of the KNOTTED family (KNOX)
belong to the TALE superclass of homeobox genes, which also
includes PBC, TGIF, MEIS, and
IRO in animals and BELL in plants (Bürglin,
1994
, 1997
). Phylogenetic analyses reveal that these homeobox genes
were already present in the common ancestor of plants, animals, and
fungi (Bharathan et al., 1997
), and, therefore, study of their function
should increase understanding not only of plant development but also of
multicellular eukaryotic organisms in general. The KNOX
genes fall into two classes (Kerstetter et al., 1994
). Although no
function is known for the class II KNOX genes, the class I
KNOX genes (KNOXI, e.g. STM1,
RS1, KN1, LeT6) appear to play a
fundamental role in shoot apical meristem formation, maintenance, and
segmentation (Vollbrecht et al., 1990
; Jackson et al., 1994
;
Schneeberger et al., 1995
; Long et al., 1996
; Chen et al., 1997
). Some
of these genes may also determine leaf characteristics as fundamental
as simple versus compound morphology (Sinha et al., 1993
; Chuck et al.,
1996
; Hareven et al., 1996
; Chen et al., 1997
). KNOXI genes
are expressed only in the shoot apical meristem and unexpanded
shoots, and not in the incipient leaf primordium, of simple
leaf-producing apices in both dicots and monocots (simple-type pattern;
Jackson et al., 1994
; Lincoln et al., 1994a
; Hareven et al., 1996
; Chen
et al., 1997
). Overexpression of KNOXI in these plants
results in the formation of leaves with lobes and ectopic shoots (Sinha
et al., 1993
; Lincoln et al., 1994b
; Chuck et al., 1996
). In contrast,
in the complex-leafed tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum), KNOXI genes are expressed in the
apical meristem and in leaf primordia (Hareven et al., 1996
; Chen et
al., 1997
), and overexpression results in increased ramification of the
complex morphology (Hareven et al., 1996
; Chen et al., 1997
; Janssen et al., 1998
). These differences in KNOXI expression and effect
in leaves of contrasting morphology suggest that KNOXI genes
may provide a degree of indeterminacy to the leaf primordia in tomato, thereby leading to an extended stage of morphogenesis and a more complex leaf form.
The FLORICAULA/LEAFY gene encodes a protein with a
transcriptional activation domain (Coen et al., 1990
; Weigel et al.,
1992
). Mutations in FLO/LFY result in replacement of flowers
with leaf-bearing shoots and a reiteration of the inflorescence phase
of development. The FLO/LFY gene product appears to be
necessary for the production of determinate floral meristems. Whereas
FLO/LFY expression is absent from vegetative meristems in
Arabidopsis and Antirrhinum majus , the gene is expressed in newly initiated leaf primordia (Blazquez et
al., 1998
). In tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) meristems, the FLO/LFY homologs NFL1 and NFL2 are
expressed in vegetative shoot apical meristems in cells that may be
precursors to procambium, as well as in the peripheral zone of the
shoot apex. It has been proposed that the role of NFL may be
to establish determinacy for recent derivatives of apical initial cells
(Kelly et al., 1995
). Hofer et al. (1997)
have shown the
unifoliata mutation in pea (Pisum sativum)
to be caused by deletions or alterations in the PEAFLO gene
(the pea homolog of FLO/LFY). Alterations in flower
development accompany leaf abnormalities in the uni
mutation. PEAFLO is expressed in initiating leaf primordia
and becomes restricted to the more distal (leaflet or tendril
initiating) regions of the leaf in older primordia. Whereas loss of
FLO/LFY function leads to indeterminacy in inflorescence and floral
meristems, loss of PEAFLO function prevents the acquisition of a
transient phase of indeterminacy in pea leaves, preventing leaflet
initiation and leading to production of a single lamina in the
uni mutation (Hofer et al., 1997
). This effect of PEAFLO on
pea leaf architecture may be the result of interactions with other,
locally restricted, genes such as COCH, AF, and
TL. Furthermore, unlike tomato, the pea compound leaf
does not express KNOXI genes (Gourlay et al., 2000
).
PHANTASTICA, an MYB domain-encoding gene, has also
been shown to play a role in leaf development (Waites and Hudson,
1995
). Mutations at the PHANTASTICA locus in A. majus lead to loss of ab-adaxial polarity in leaves and
floral organs (Waites and Hudson, 1995
). It has been suggested that the
juxtaposition of abaxial and adaxial fates allows for blade growth
(Waites and Hudson, 1995
; McConnell and Barton, 1998
). Although a role
for the PHAN gene in leaf initiation events has not been
elucidated, the gene is expressed in a pattern complementary to that
seen for STM1 (Waites et al., 1998
). The maize
PHAN ortholog (RS2) serves to down-regulate class
I KNOX gene expression in leaf primordia (Taylor, 1997
;
Schneeberger et al., 1998
; Timmermans et al., 1999
; Tsiantis et al.,
1999
; Byrne et al., 2000
). PHAN has been shown to play a
role in generation of the leaf blade in A. majus, and
reduced PHAN leads to suppression of blade growth (Waites
and Hudson, 1995
). Other genes displaying similar roles in generating
blade growth are the YABBY (Sawa et al., 1999
; Siegfried et
al., 1999
) and PHABULOSA (PHAB) gene families
(McConnell and Barton, 1998
; McConnell et al., 2001
).
| |
THE INVOLVEMENT OF AS YET UNKNOWN LOCI IN LEAF EVOLUTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Although it is reasonable to presume that genes with known
functions/expression patterns will have a role in the morphogenesis and
evolution of leaf complexity, it is likely that a number of as yet
unknown loci also play a role. With near-saturation mutagenesis in
maize (Zea mays) and
Arabidopsis (both model systems with simple leaves), no mutation has
been found that causes compound leaves to be produced. Furthermore,
although we know that increased expression of KNOXI/LEAFY
genes is seen to occur in compound-leafed species (like tomato/pea),
experimental overexpression of these genes in simple-leafed maize or
Arabidopsis does not cause the production of compound leaves. In
addition, genes such as CLAVATA, by interacting with
KNOX genes (Clark et al., 1996
), may also have a minor role in regulating leaf complexity. We hypothesize that differences in leaf
morphology are related, at least in part, to differential expression of
key genes, such as STM, LFY, PHAN,
YABBY, and PHAB, during development of the
different leaf types. This hypothesis is reasonable in the light of
data suggesting that the expression of KNOXI genes and
PHAN in tomato is unique and different from that seen in
maize and Arabidopsis (Hareven et al., 1996
; Chen et al., 1997
; Parnis
et al., 1997
; Koltai and Bird, 2000
).
| |
HYPOTHESES FOR COMPOUND LEAF MORPHOGENESIS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
According to the telome theory (Zimmerman, 1952
) complex
leaves originated from indeterminate shoots, and these events
occurred independently in the fern and seed plant lineages (Stewart and Rothwell, 1993
). These indeterminate shoots likely expressed the KNOXI genes (known to play a role in shoot meristem
maintenance and organization). In the angiosperms, the ancestral leaf
form was simple (perhaps generated by suppression of KNOXI
expression in some appendages), and complex leaves arose independently
multiple times in this group (Goliber et al., 1998
). We propose that
this ancestrally simple leaf became complex by one of two routes. The primordium may have acquired indeterminacy by gaining either
KNOXI or FLORICAULA/LEAFY function in leaf
primordia and thus became complex (Fig.
1). Alternatively, PHAN
expression was regulated in the primordium so that blade growth was
interrupted in parts leading to a dissected leaf (Fig.
2).
|
|
Analysis of gene expression patterns in a phylogenetic context might
help answer this question. The role of the KNOX genes and
LFY/FLO in leaf evolution and development and the role of PHAN/YAB/PHAB in regulating dissection particularly in relation to
simple versus compound leaves should help discriminate between the two
alternative hypotheses proposed above. It should be noted that, because
PHAN has been shown to regulate KNOXI expression, the role of these two
kinds of genes may not be mutually exclusive in the context of compound
leaf generation. It has been shown that several mutations that cause
the Arabidopsis leaf to become lobed show ectopic KNOX expression in
these lobed leaves (Ori et al., 2000
). With an improved understanding
of vascular plant relationships (Kenrick and Crane, 1997
; Pryer et al.,
2001
) and molecular regulation of development (Ori et al., 2000
), new
ways will be utilized to analyze unique morphological features in plants.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Received September 24, 2001; accepted October 3, 2001.
1 This work was funded by the National Science Foundation (grant no. IBN-9983063 and IBN-0092599).
* Corresponding author; e-mail nrsinha{at}ucdavis.edu; fax 530-752-5410.
www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.010867.
| |
LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H. Wang, J. Chen, J. Wen, M. Tadege, G. Li, Y. Liu, K. S. Mysore, P. Ratet, and R. Chen Control of Compound Leaf Development by FLORICAULA/LEAFY Ortholog SINGLE LEAFLET1 in Medicago truncatula Plant Physiology, April 1, 2008; 146(4): 1759 - 1772. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. McLellan Correlated evolution of leaf shape and trichomes in Begonia dregei (Begoniaceae) Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2005; 92(10): 1616 - 1623. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. E. Friedman, R. C. Moore, and M. D. Purugganan The evolution of plant development Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2004; 91(10): 1726 - 1741. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. A. McHale and R. E. Koning MicroRNA-Directed Cleavage of Nicotiana sylvestris PHAVOLUTA mRNA Regulates the Vascular Cambium and Structure of Apical Meristems PLANT CELL, July 1, 2004; 16(7): 1730 - 1740. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Roig, C. Pozzi, L. Santi, J. Muller, Y. Wang, M. R. Stile, L. Rossini, M. Stanca, and F. Salamini Genetics of Barley Hooded Suppression Genetics, May 1, 2004; 167(1): 439 - 448. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. A. McHale and R. E. Koning PHANTASTICA Regulates Development of the Adaxial Mesophyll in Nicotiana Leaves PLANT CELL, May 1, 2004; 16(5): 1251 - 1262. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. L. Micol and S. Hake The Development of Plant Leaves Plant Physiology, February 1, 2003; 131(2): 389 - 394. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|