|
|
||||||||
|
First published online October 9, 2003; 10.1104/pp.103.027086 Plant Physiology 133:1367-1375 (2003) © 2003 American Society of Plant Biologists Interactive Effects of Jasmonic Acid, Salicylic Acid, and Gibberellin on Induction of Trichomes in Arabidopsis1Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, 1101 E. 57th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637
Leaf trichomes protect plants from attack by insect herbivores and are often induced following damage. Hormonal regulation of this plant induction response has not been previously studied. In a series of experiments, we addressed the effects of artificial damage, jasmonic acid, salicylic acid, and gibberellin on induction of trichomes in Arabidopsis. Artificial damage and jasmonic acid caused significant increases in trichome production of leaves. The jar1-1 mutant exhibited normal trichome induction following treatment with jasmonic acid, suggesting that adenylation of jasmonic acid is not necessary. Salicylic acid had a negative effect on trichome production and consistently reduced the effect of jasmonic acid, suggesting negative cross-talk between the jasmonate and salicylate-dependent defense pathways. Interestingly, the effect of salicylic acid persisted in the nim1-1 mutant, suggesting that the Npr1/Nim1 gene is not downstream of salicylic acid in the negative regulation of trichome production. Last, we found that gibberellin and jasmonic acid had a synergistic effect on the induction of trichomes, suggesting important interactions between these two compounds.
Insect herbivores can substantially reduce the fitness of plants (Crawley, 1983
Many plant species respond to insect damage by increasing the density and/or number of trichomes on new leaves (Myers and Bazely, 1991
Induction of resistance to herbivores and pathogens is generally regulated by a network of signal transduction pathways in which salicylic acid and jasmonic acid function as key signaling molecules (Glazebrook, 2001 In this study, we first investigated whether artificial wounding increases the density or number of trichomes on newly produced leaves of Arabidopsis. We then asked whether jasmonic acid causes induction of trichomes and whether adenylation of jasmonic acid is necessary. Next, we asked whether salicylic acid has a negative effect on trichome production and whether salicylic acid negatively regulates the response of plants to jasmonic acid. In addition, we assessed the role of the Npr1/Nim1 gene in the induction of trichomes. Last, we applied gibberellin, jasmonic acid, and salicylic acid alone and in combination to assess how gibberellin interacts with jasmonic acid and salicylic acid.
Artificial Wounding Increases Trichome Density and Number
An effect of artificial wounding on trichome induction in Arabidopsis has not been previously reported. We performed such a test on three widely used accessions (Columbia, Wassilewskija, and Landsberg erecta) that serve as backgrounds for important mutants of Arabidopsis. We present trichome density because this metric is most relevant for defense against herbivores (Traw and Dawson, 2002b
Artificial wounding and herbivory typically trigger jasmonate-dependent responses in plants (Bostock, 1999
The jasmonic acid response mutant (jar1-1) produces jasmonic acid but does not adenylate it (Staswick et al., 2002
Given that the jasmonate and salicylate pathways generally exhibit negative cross-talk in Arabidopsis (Spoel et al., 2003
Our finding that jasmonic acid and salicylic acid alter leaf trichome number prompted us to ask whether the response was due to a change in the proportion of epidermal cells receiving the trichome fate or whether there were simply more epidermal cells per leaf. To address this question, we estimated cell numbers on a subset of leaves treated with 0.1 or 1.0 mM jasmonic acid or salicylic acid. We found no evidence of differences in epidermal cell numbers between control leaves and leaves treated with jasmonic acid (Fig. 2C) or salicylic acid (Fig. 3C), thus trichome induction apparently resulted from an increased probability that epidermal cells become trichomes.
Having observed differential effects of jasmonic acid and salicylic acid on trichome production, we asked whether these two elicitors interact in their effects on trichome production. If salicylic acid negatively regulates the jasmonate-dependent pathway (Spoel et al., 2003 To test this prediction, we used an intermediate concentration (0.45 mM) for each elicitor. Plants received water, 0.45 mM jasmonic acid alone, 0.45 mM salicylic acid alone, or both 0.45 mM jasmonic acid and 0.45 mM salicylic acid. We applied these four treatments to plants of Columbia and Wassilewskija in a completely randomized experiment. For details of treatment application, trichome measurements, and statistical analysis, see "Materials and Methods." As in the previous experiments, jasmonic acid alone caused large increases in trichome density (Fig. 4A) and number (Fig. 4B). Averaged across the two lines, plants treated with jasmonic acid alone had 70.9% higher trichome density (F1,26 = 32.5, P < 0.001) and 67.8% higher trichome number (F1,26 = 53.8, P < 0.001) relative to control plants. However, when plants received both jasmonic acid and salicylic acid, they produced new leaves with only 18.3% higher trichome density (F1,26 = 2.4, P = 0.127) and 37.4% higher trichome number (F1,26 = 6.3, P = 0.018) relative to equivalent leaves of control plants. This reduced effect of jasmonic acid in the presence of salicylic acid was supported by a significant jasmonic acid by salicylic acid interaction term in the three-way analysis of variance for both trichome density (F1,26 = 5.6, P = 0.025; Table I) and number (F1,26 = 4.6, P = 0.040; Table I). The results were therefore consistent with the presence of negative cross-talk between the salicylate and jasmonate-dependent defense pathways in Arabidopsis.
The non-inducible immunity (nim1-1) mutant is in the Wassilewskija background and does not induce defensive proteins following elicitation with biotrophic bacteria or application of salicylic acid (Delaney et al., 1995 To test these predictions, we treated the nim1-1 mutant and Wassilewskija with 0, 0.1, or 1 mM jasmonic acid in one experiment and with 0, 0.1, or 1 mM salicylic acid in another experiment. For details of treatment application, trichome measurements, and statistical analysis, see "Materials and Methods." The nim1-1 mutant responded to jasmonic acid with a significant increase in trichome density (Fig. 5A) and trichome number (Fig. 5C). However, the induction response was significantly reduced relative to that of its background, Wassilewskija, at the higher concentration of jasmonic acid for both trichome density (F1,28 = 10.6, P = 0.002) and trichome number (F1,28 = 10.3, P = 0.003). The result was therefore the opposite of our prediction that the nim1-1 mutant would have an increased response to jasmonic acid and suggests that the Npr1/Nim1 gene may accentuate induction of trichomes following the application of jasmonic acid. Additionally, the nim1-1 mutant responded to salicylic acid with a significant decrease in trichome density (Fig. 5B) and trichome number (Fig. 5D), contrary to our second prediction that it would not respond to salicylic acid. Because the response of nim1-1 to salicylic acid did not differ from Wassilewskija, our results suggest that the Npr1/Nim1 gene does not contribute to the negative regulation of trichome induction by salicylic acid.
Gibberellin is a hormone that regulates plant growth and developmental events ranging from seed germination to the timing of flowering and senescence. Gibberellin appears to have a primary role in initiating Arabidopsis trichomes (Chien and Sussex, 1996 To address the interactions among jasmonic acid, salicylic acid, and gibberellin, we applied a 0.45 mM concentration of each compound alone and in all possible combinations. We applied these treatments to plants of Landsberg erecta in a completely randomized experiment. We chose Landsberg erecta because this is the wild-type background for important gibberellin mutants. For details of treatment application, trichome measurements, and statistical analysis, see "Materials and Methods." There were strong interactions between jasmonic acid and gibberellin (Table II). In the absence of gibberellin, leaves of plants treated with jasmonic acid exhibited an increase of only 5% in trichome density and number. In the presence of gibberellin, leaves of plants treated with jasmonic acid increased 48.9% in trichome density and 93.1% in trichome number. The greater effect of jasmonic acid in the presence of gibberellin was significant according to the jasmonic acid by gibberellin interaction term in the analysis of variance for trichome density (F1,82 = 3.7, P = 0.056; Table II) and number (F1,82 = 6.9, P = 0.009; Table II).
Additionally, there were strong interactions between jasmonic acid and salicylic acid in the production of trichomes. In the absence of salicylic acid, jasmonic acid caused an increase of 31.4% in trichome density and 35.0% in trichome number. In the presence of salicylic acid, jasmonic acid caused a decrease of 0.9% in trichome density and 0.1% in trichome number. The reduced effect of jasmonic acid in the presence of salicylic acid was significant according to the jasmonic acid by salicylic acid interaction term in the analysis of variance for trichome density (F1,82 = 4.7, P = 0.032; Table II) and number (F1,82 = 10.2, P = 0.002; Table II). This result was consistent with our earlier findings for Columbia and Wassilewskija. Interestingly, there was also evidence of interaction between gibberellin and salicylic acid. In the absence of salicylic acid, gibberellin caused an increase of 72.0% in trichome number. In the presence of salicylic acid, gibberellin caused only an increase of 29.6% in trichome number. The reduced effect of gibberellin in the presence of salicylic acid was significant according to the gibberellin by salicylic acid interaction term in the analysis of variance for trichome number (F1,82 = 7.4, P = 0.007; Table II). We performed the experiment twice with similar results.
Trichomes and thorns are structural traits that protect plants from leaf-damaging insects (Levin, 1973
Jasmonic acid is either methylated (Seo et al., 2001
Salicylic acid or a downstream component reduced trichome density and number on new leaves (Figs. 3, 4, and 5). This is a novel finding for exogenously applied salicylic acid. It is also consistent with observations by Bowling et al. (1997
Our results suggest a role of the Npr1/Nim1 gene in the trichome induction response to jasmonic acid but not in the manner suggested for other jasmonatedependent responses (Spoel et al., 2003
Our results also support a synergistic association between gibberellin and jasmonic acid in the induction of trichomes. Some evidence suggests that jasmonate may up-regulate gibberellin in wounded petunia (Petunia hybrida) corollas (Tamari et al., 1995 In summary, our study provides the first evidence that artificial damage and jasmonic acid cause the induction of trichomes in Arabidopsis. The effect of jasmonic acid reflected an increase in the proportion of cells that became trichomes, rather than an increase in the overall epidermal cell number of the leaves. Adenylation of jasmonic acid was not necessary for the induction response. Salicylic acid down-regulated trichome production and exhibited negative cross-talk with the jasmonate-dependent pathway. This is the first observation of negative cross-talk between these two major induction pathways in their effects on a physical/structural plant defense. Gibberellin and jasmonic acid exhibited a synergistic effect on trichome production, suggesting an important link between these two pathways in Arabidopsis.
Plant Material and Growth Conditions The Columbia (Col-0) and Wassilewskija (Ws-0) ecotypes, as well as the jar1-1 mutant, were obtained from the Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center. The nim1-1 mutant and Landsberg erecta ecotype were provided by Novartis Agribusiness Biotechnology (Basel, Switzerland) and Lehle Seeds (Round Rock, TX), respectively. Seeds were sown on wet Promix-BX (Premier Horticulture, Red Hill, PA) in 36-celled flats. Flats were placed in the dark at 4°C for 3 d and moved 3 d later to an environmental growth chamber with a temperature of 20°C and 12 h of artificial light at 500 µmol m2 s1 photosynthetically active radiation from halogen arc lamps. The day of germination was considered d 1 of the experiment. Plants were watered daily and fertilized twice per week with 30 mL of 200 1 g L1 Peter's 15:16:17 NPK solution. Flats were thinned to one plant per cell on d 10.
Artificial wounding consisted of one or two pinches with serrated forceps to each of the three largest leaves of plants on d 19 of plant growth, when plants typically had six to eight leaves on their main stem. Solutions of jasmonic acid (J-2500, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis), salicylic acid (S-7401, Sigma-Aldrich), and gibberellin (A3; #G-1025, Sigma-Aldrich) were neutralized to pH 7 through the addition of NaOH. Jasmonic acid was added from a concentrated stock solution containing 100% (v/v) ethanol. Each treatment consisted of 0.6 mL of the appropriate solution, applied by pipettor to the top surface of all leaves greater than 1 cm in length. Controls for the application of salicylic acid and gibberellin received 0.6 mL of water, whereas controls for the application of jasmonic acid received 0.6 mL of water and a minute amount of ethanol, to control for the presence of ethanol in the stock solution. Jasmonic acid and gibberellin were applied on d 19, whereas salicylic acid was applied on d 20 to allow the other compounds sufficient time to be taken up by the plant. After the application of salicylic acid, the youngest visible leaf was marked with black ink to facilitate later selection of a target leaf for trichome measurement.
We measured trichome density and number on the second new leaf produced following the application of treatments. This leaf was chosen because, at the time of damage, it was the leaf most likely to be in the developmental stage at which trichome fates are assigned to cells (Larkin et al., 1996
The target leaf was first removed from the plant and traced. A leaf disc (area = 0.29 cm2) was then removed by hole punch from the center of the leaf blade and counted for adaxial trichome number under a dissecting microscope (Zeiss, Jena, Germany). Trichome density was calculated as the trichome number per disc divided by the disc area. Leaf tracings were scanned and digitized for area determination using a graphic analysis program (ImageJ for Windows v1.29). Leaf trichome number was calculated as the trichome density multiplied by the leaf area. Because trichomes are distributed uniformly across the upper surface of mature leaves of Arabidopsis (Larkin et al., 1996
Top-surface epidermal cell number was scaled up from cell counts of a small rectangular area randomly selected on each leaf disc (area = 0.091 cm2) as seen under the 40x oil immersion objective of a compound microscope. Cell density was multiplied by leaf area to provide an estimate of top-surface epidermal cell number per leaf. Because cell counts were highly time consuming, only two replicate plants per treatment were measured.
Unless otherwise noted, each mean represents the average of five replicate plants. We analyzed each experiment by ANOVA. In several of the analyses, we removed outliers so that the residuals satisfied the assumption of normality, but this did not alter the conclusions drawn. In tables and figures, all P values survived sequential Bonferroni corrections to correct table and figure-wide confidence to
We thank J. Coswell, S. Suwanski, and J. Zdenek for plant care and M. Goto for assistance with measurements. We thank J. Larkin, J. Greenberg, and J. Lu for helpful discussions and C. Ballare, A. Agrawal, and two anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript. We are grateful to Novartis Agribusiness Biotechnology for providing the nim1-1 mutant. We thank the Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center for the jar1-1 mutant. Received May 20, 2003; returned for revision June 10, 2003; accepted August 14, 2003.
Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.103.027086.
1 This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (Doctoral Dissertation Improvement grant no. IBN 0073095 to M.B.T.) and by the National Institutes of Health (grant no. GM 62504 to J.B.). M.B.T. was supported in part by a V. Dropkin Foundation postdoctoral fellowship. * Corresponding author; e-mail jbergels{at}midway.uchicago.edu; fax 7737029740.
Agrawal AA (1998) Induced responses to herbivory and increased plant performance. Science 279: 12011202 Agrawal AA (1999) Induced responses to herbivory in wild radish: effects on several herbivores and plant fitness. Ecology 80: 17131723[CrossRef] Agrawal AA (2000) Benefits and costs of induced plant defense for Lepidium virginicum (Brassicaceae). Ecology 81: 18041813 Agren J, Schemske DW (1994) Evolution of trichome number in a naturalized population of Brassica rapa. Am Nat 143: 113[CrossRef]
Baker B, Zambryski P, Staskawicz B, Dinesh-Kumar SP (1997) Signaling in plant-microbe interactions. Science 276: 726733 Baur R, Binder S, Benz G (1991) Nonglandular leaf trichomes as short-term inducible defense of the grey alder, Alnus incana (L), against the chrysomelid beetle, Agelastica alni L. Oecologia 87: 219226 Bostock RM (1999) Signal conflicts and synergies in induced resistance to multiple attackers. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 55: 99109[CrossRef] Bostock RM, Karban R, Thaler JS, Weyman PD, Gilchrist D (2001) Signal interactions in induced resistance to pathogens and insect herbivores. Eur J Plant Pathol 107: 103111[CrossRef] Bowling SA, Clarke JD, Liu Y, Klessig DF, Dong X (1997) The cpr5 mutant of Arabidopsis expresses both NPR1-dependent and NPR1-independent resistance. Plant Cell 9: 15731584[Abstract] Cao H, Glazebrook J, Clarke JD, Volko S, Dong X (1997) The Arabidopsis NPR1 gene that controls systemic acquired resistance encodes a novel protein containing ankyrin repeats. Cell 88: 5763[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Chien JC, Sussex IM (1996) Differential regulation of trichome formation on the adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces by gibberellins and photoperiod in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. Plant Physiol 111: 13211328[Abstract] Crawley MJ (1983) Herbivory: The Dynamics of Animal-Plant Interactions. University of California Press, Berkeley
Cui J, Jander G, Racki LR, Kim P, Pierce NE, Ausubel FM (2002) Signals involved in Arabidopsis resistance to Trichoplusia ni caterpillars induced by virulent and avirulent strains of the phytopathogen Pseudomonas syringae. Plant Physiol 129: 551564 Delaney TP (2000) New mutants provide clues into regulation of systemic acquired resistance. Trends Plant Sci 5: 4951[Medline]
Delaney TP, Friedrich L, Ryals JA (1995) Arabidopsis signal transduction mutant defective in chemically and biologically induced disease resistance. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 66026606 Fernandes GW (1994) Plant mechanical defenses against insect herbivory. Rev Bras Entomol 38: 421433 Gaffney T, Friedrich L, Vernooij B, Negrotto D, Nye G, Uknes S, Ward E, Kessmann H, Ryals J (1993) Requirement of salicylic acid for the induction of systemic acquired resistance. Science 261: 754756 Glazebrook J (2001) Genes controlling expression of defense responses in Arabidopsis: 2001 status. Curr Opin Plant Biol 4: 301308[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Hamada S, Onouchi H, Tanaka H, Kudo M, Liu Y, Shibata D, Machida C, Machida Y (2000) Mutations in the WUSCHEL gene of Arabidopsis thaliana result in the development of shoots without juvenile leaves. Plant J 24: 91101[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Haughn GW, Somerville CR (1988) Genetic control of morphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Dev Genet 9: 7389 Hülskamp M, Schnittger A (1998) Spatial regulation of trichome formation Arabidopsis thaliana. Semin Cell Dev Biol 9: 213220[CrossRef][Medline] Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced Responses to Herbivory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Kunkel BN, Brooks DM (2002) Cross talk between signaling pathways in pathogen defense. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5: 325331[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Larkin JC, Young N, Prigge M, Marks MD (1996) The control of trichome spacing and number in Arabidopsis. Development 122: 9971005[Abstract] Levin DA (1973) The role of trichomes in plant defense. Q Rev Biol 48: 315[CrossRef] Marks MD (1997) Molecular genetic analysis of trichome development in Arabidopsis. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 48: 137163[CrossRef][ISI] Marquis RJ (1992) The selective impact of herbivores. In RS Fritz, EL Simms, eds, Plant Resistance to Herbivores and Pathogens: Ecology, Evolution, and Genetics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 301325 Mauricio R, Rausher MD (1997) Experimental manipulation of putative selective agents provides evidence for the role of natural enemies in the evolution of plant defense. Evolution 51: 14351444[CrossRef] Myers JH, Bazely D (1991) Thorns, spines, prickles, and hairs: Are they stimulated by herbivory and do they deter herbivores? In DW Tallamy, MJ Raupp, eds, Phytochemical Induction by Herbivores. Wiley, New York, pp 325344
Perazza D, Vachon G, Herzog M (1998) Gibberellins promote trichome formation by up-regulating GLABROUS1 in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 117: 375383 Pullin AS, Gilbert JE (1989) The stinging nettle, Urtica dioica, increases trichome density after herbivore and mechanical damage. Oikos 54: 275280
Reymond P, Weber H, Damond M, Farmer EE (2000) Differential gene expression in response to mechanical wounding and insect feeding in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 12: 707719 Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223225[CrossRef][ISI] Roy BA, Stanton ML, Eppley SM (1999) Effects of environmental stress on leaf hair density and consequences for selection. J Evol Biol 12: 10891103[CrossRef] Ryals J, Uknes S, Ward E (1994) Systemic acquired resistance. Plant Physiol 104: 11091112[ISI][Medline]
Seo HS, Song JT, Cheong J, Lee Y, Lee Y, Hwang I, Lee JS, Choi YD (2001) Jasmonic acid carboxyl methyltransferase: a key enzyme for jasmonate-regulated plant responses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 47884793
Spoel SH, Koornneef A, Claessens SMC, Korzelius JP, van Pelt JA, Mueller MJ, Buchala AJ, Metraux J, Brown R, Kazan K et al. (2003) NPR1 modulates cross-talk between salicylate- and jasmonate-dependent defense pathways through a novel function in the cytosol. Plant Cell 15: 760770
Staswick PE, Su W, Howell SH (1992) Methyl jasmonate inhibition of root growth and induction of a leaf protein are decreased in an Arabidopsis thaliana mutant. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 68376840
Staswick PE, Tiryaki I, Rowe ML (2002) Jasmonate response locus JAR1 and several related Arabidopsis genes encode enzymes of the firefly luciferase superfamily that show activity on jasmonic, salicylic, and indole-3-acetic acids in an assay for adenylation. Plant Cell 14: 14051415 Staswick PE, Yuen GY, Lehman CC (1998) Jasmonate signaling mutants of Arabidopsis are susceptible to the soil fungus Pythium irregulare. Plant J 15: 747754[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Stotz HU, Koch T, Biedermann A, Weniger K, Boland W, Mitchell-Olds T (2002) Evidence for regulation of resistance in Arabidopsis to Egyptian cotton worm by salicylic and jasmonic acid signaling pathways. Planta 214: 648652[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Tamari G, Borochov A, Atzorn R, Weiss D (1995) Methyl jasmonate induces pigmentation and flavinoid gene expression in petunia corollas: a possible role in wound response. Physiol Plant 94: 4550[CrossRef] Telfer A, Bollman KM, Poethig RS (1997) Phase change and the regulation of trichome distribution in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development 124: 645654[Abstract] Thaler JS, Fidantsef AL, Duffey SS, Bostock RM (1999) Tradeoffs in plant defense against pathogens and herbivores: a field demonstration of chemical elicitors of induced resistance. J Chem Ecol 25: 15971609[CrossRef] Thaler JS, Karban R, Ullman DE, Boege K, Bostock RM (2002) Cross-talk between jasmonate and salicylate plant defense pathways: effects on several plant parasites. Oecologia 131: 227235 Thomma BPHJ, Penninckx IAMA, Broekaert WF, Cammue BPA (2001) The complexity of disease signaling in Arabidopsis. Curr Opin Immunol 13: 6368[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Ton J, De Vos M, Robben C, Buchala A, Metraux JP, van Loon LC, Pieterse CMJ (2002) Characterization of Arabidopsis enhanced disease susceptibility mutants that are affected in systemically induced resistance. Plant J 29: 1121[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] Traw MB (2002) Is induction response negatively correlated with constitutive resistance in black mustard? Evolution 56: 21962205[ISI][Medline] Traw MB, Dawson TE (2002a) Differential induction of trichomes by three herbivores of black mustard. Oecologia 131: 526532[CrossRef][ISI] Traw MB, Dawson TE (2002b) Reduced performance of two specialist herbivores (Lepidoptera: Pieridae, Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on new leaves of damaged black mustard plants. Environ Entomol 31: 714722 Traw MB, Kim J, Enright S, Cipollini DF, Bergelson J (2003) Negative cross-talk between salicylate and jasmonate-mediated pathways in the Wassilewskija ecotype of Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Ecol 12: 11251135[CrossRef][Medline] van Poecke RMP, Dicke M (2002) Induced parasitoid attraction by Arabidopsis thaliana: involvement of the octadecanoid and the salicylic acid pathway. J Exp Biol 53: 17931799 van Poecke RMP, Dicke M (2003) Signal transduction downstream of salicylic and jasmonic acid in herbivory-induced parasitoid attraction by Arabidopsis is independent of JAR1 and NPR1. Plant Cell Environ 26: 15411548[CrossRef] Related articles in Plant Physiol.:
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||