|
|
||||||||
|
First published online July 9, 2004; 10.1104/pp.104.038893 Plant Physiology 135:1407-1416 (2004) © 2004 American Society of Plant Biologists Green Light Stimulates Early Stem Elongation, Antagonizing Light-Mediated Growth Inhibition1Plant Molecular and Cellular Biology Program and Horticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611
During the transition from darkness to light, the rate of hypocotyl elongation is determined from the integration of light signals sensed through the phototropin, cryptochrome, and phytochrome signaling pathways. In all light conditions studied, from UV to far-red, early hypocotyl growth is rapidly and robustly suppressed within minutes of illumination in a manner dependent upon light quality and quantity. In this study, it is shown that green light (GL) irradiation leads to a rapid increase in the growth rate of etiolated Arabidopsis seedlings. GL-mediated growth promotion was detected in response to constant irradiation or a short, single pulse of light with a similar time course. The response has a threshold between 101 and 100 µmol m2, is saturated before 102 µmol m2 and obeys reciprocity. Genetic analyses indicate that the cryptochrome or phototropin photoreceptors do not participate in the response. The major phytochrome receptors influence the normal amplitude and timing of the GL response, yet the GL response is normal in seedlings grown for hours under constant dim-red light. Therefore, phytochrome activation enhances, but is not required for, the GL response. Seedlings grown under green, red, and blue light together are longer than those grown under red and blue alone. These data indicate that a novel GL-activated light sensor promotes early stem elongation that antagonizes growth inhibition.
The first sensing of light transitions the etiolated seedling into a developmental program that prepares the plant for autotrophy. This process, photomorphogenesis, is typified by changes at the biochemical, molecular, and physiological levels that guide early plant morphology during establishment. One of the most conspicuous changes to occur during photomorphogenic development is an inhibition of hypocotyl (stem) growth rate. Ultraviolet, blue, red, and far-red light each rapidly inhibit stem growth within minutes of irradiation (Meijer, 1968
High-resolution imaging techniques have allowed monitoring of the growth inhibition process with high temporal resolution in the miniscule Arabidopsis seedling. These methods facilitated genetic tests to describe two critical parameters of the growth inhibition response: first, which photosensors mediate early growth inhibition, and second, precisely when specific photosensors contribute to this rapid response. These studies demonstrated that growth inhibition is dependent upon contributions from phytochromes, phototropins, and cryptochromes, often acting in a sequential and orchestrated manner (Parks et al., 2001a
Monochromatic green light (GL) has been shown to act as a signal in regulating specific facets of plant physiology, inhibiting seedling mass, plant cell culture growth, and light-induced gravitropic root elongation (Klein, 1992 In this report, high-resolution analyses of early growth kinetics have identified that GL irradiation causes a rapid increase in early stem elongation rate, a response that is contrary to that induced by all other light conditions studied. The transient growth promotion is evident within 15 min of irradiation, its magnitude is regulated in a dose-dependent manner, and it cannot be completely attributed genetically or photophysiologically to the described action of known photoreceptors. This report presents photophysiological and genetic characterization of a novel response to narrow-bandwidth GL.
Time Course of GL-Induced Growth Promotion
Figure 1 shows the mean normalized growth kinetics of 24 individual seedlings grown under 1 h of constant dim GL (2 x 101 µmol m2 s1) compared to idealized growth kinetics of plants responding to saturating blue, red, and far-red light (Parks et al., 2001a
The high amplitude of growth induction is transient. Dark-grown seedlings were irradiated with 2 x 101 µmol m2 s1 GL, and their growth rates were assessed over 4 h. The results are presented in Figure 2A. Robust growth promotion is evident for the first hour then proceeds at a growth rate that exceeds the dark rate for the remainder of the experiment.
Dark/Green Light Intervals Actuate the Rapid Growth Response
Seedlings grown for days under GL are typically shorter than dark-grown seedlings (Lin et al., 1995a The results in Figure 2B indicate that GL pulses can actuate the rapid growth response. Dark-grown seedlings were given the initial GL pulse to induce rapid growth. After 1 h, the seedlings were imaged in darkness for 1 h. The rapidly growing seedlings return to the dark growth rate within 30 min after the GL signal is removed. When seedlings are irradiated again with a GL pulse, they resume the rapid growth rate.
Since the major increase in growth rate occurs within the first hour following the GL pulse, fluence-response relationship between a GL pulse and growth promotion was tested in this time frame. Seedling growth kinetics were monitored after treatment with a short, single pulse of GL with a duration between 0.5 and 500 s, ranging in fluence between 101 and 103 µmol m2 (Fig. 3). Growth promotion was induced during this time course with a threshold between 100 and 101 µmol m2 and saturation above 102 µmol m2. The growth rate of seedlings pulsed with 100 µmol m2 is only slightly higher than dark controls, although statistically significant elongation becomes evident after 50 min. Higher fluences of GL hasten the timing and increase the magnitude of growth promotion. A 103 pulse leads to strong growth promotion by 20 min followed by transient and reproducible growth inhibition at 35 min. The consistent decline in growth rate is presumably due to activation of additional photosensory systems that inhibit growth. This speculation is later confirmed in Figure 6.
The amplitude of growth promotion for any given fluence was independent of duration of the pulse (Fig. 4). Dark-grown seedlings were irradiated with 102 µmol m2 GL delivered over 5, 50, or 500 s. The growth rate was monitored as described for Figure 3. The results indicate that a 102 µmol m2 pulse induces a response with similar magnitude and time course. Seedlings treated with a 101 µmol m2 pulse of GL delivered over various durations also show a similar increase in growth rate under all conditions tested (data not shown). These data indicate that the response obeys the Bunsen-Roscoe law of reciprocity and therefore is activated by first-order photochemistry.
Genetic Analyses
The GL sources used in this study stimulate known photoreceptors to some degree. The flavin chromophore of cryptochromes may exist as a flavin-semiquinone that can absorb in the green portion of the spectrum (Lin et al., 1995a
Indirect tests, such as fluence-response analyses, suggest that phototropins are not involved in this response, as even minor excitation of phototropins (<1 µmol m2 blue light) will induce 50% growth inhibition within 15 min (Folta et al., 2003b Although this evidence implies that known photoreceptors are not likely mediating this response, this conclusion can be directly tested by monitoring growth kinetics in photoreceptor mutant backgrounds. Mutant seedlings were planted, germinated, and tested in a manner identical to wild-type seedlings. The effect of mutations on the GL response was measured for 1 h under one of two conditions: in response to low-fluence rate constant GL (2 x 101 µmol m2 s1; Fig. 5) or in response to a high-fluence single GL pulse (103 µmol m2; Fig. 6). Under constant low-fluence GL irradiation, mutant seedlings responded essentially as wild type. The exception was that phyAphyB mutants exhibited a slight (1015 min) delay in the onset of growth promotion (Fig. 5D). To further test the role, if any, of phytochromes in the GL response, the growth kinetics of single phyA and phyB mutants were assessed under constant low-fluence rate GL. The mean growth kinetic profiles of many individual seedlings are shown in Figure 5, E and F. Both phyA and phyB exhibited only minor timing deviations, indicating that either of the major phytochromes is sufficient to allow the full response to dim GL.
The timing and amplitude of growth promotion are not significantly affected in cry1cry2 or phot1phot2 mutants in response to a high-fluence pulse of GL (103 µmol m2 pulse; Fig. 6). The kinetics match those of wild-type plants but are slightly higher in amplitude and do not exhibit the inhibition observed between 20 to 35 min. These data indicate that the GL pulse is sufficient to induce transient growth inhibition, imparted through at least a cryptochrome and a phototropin receptor. The inhibition likely arises from blue light (<1% of light from the LED source is between 493500 nm) activation of phot1 and/or cry1/cry2, or possibly GL activation of these flavin-based receptors in their semiquinone state. After a single 103 µmol m2 GL pulse phyAphyB mutants still exhibit growth promotion, although the onset is delayed (Fig. 6C). To determine which phytochrome receptor is required for the response, the response was measured in phyA and phyB single mutants. Both phyA and phyB mutants display GL-induced growth promotion, with a 10- to 15-min delay in the onset of the response. These data suggest that a subset of the five Arabidopsis phytochromes may act redundantly in generating GL growth promotion. This possibility may be tested using the hy1 mutant, which contains a lesion in a heme oxygenase gene required for chromophore synthesis (Davis et al., 1999
Although phyA, phyB, and hy1 mutants maintain the general response to GL, it remains a formal possibility that minor phytochromes may redundantly contribute to the response. The light conditions tested provide ample energy to activate accumulation of phyA-induced nuclear transcripts (Tepperman et al., 2001 Two-day-old, etiolated seedlings were grown between 2 to 5 h under continuous dim-red light (2.03.0 x 102 µmol m2 s1). Seedlings exhibited stable growth, elongating between 90% and 100% of their absolute dark-growth rate. Seedlings were then imaged for 1 h under constant red light conditions and then were treated with a single 1.0 x 102 µmol m2 pulse of GL. The results are shown in Figure 7. The data indicate that the GL response persists normally in a background of dim-red light, even when phytochrome is exerting slight growth inhibition. This finding shows that although phytochromes are necessary for normal growth promotion by GL, activation of phytochrome alone generates growth inhibition, and growth promotion is dependent upon activation of an additional GL sensor.
Supplemental GL Antagonizes Long-Term Blue and Red Light Effects on Stem Growth Enhanced growth under monochromatic GL suggests that a system is in place to counter the effects of inhibitory wavebands. Growth of seedlings under growth-inhibitory conditions (blue and red light) supplemented with GL may allow separation of the GL-mediated growth promotion from the inhibitory influence mediated through other photoreceptors. If GL-supplemented seedlings grew taller than those grown under blue and red alone, this would provide additional evidence against GL growth promotion being mediated through partial activation of known photoreceptors or low-level coaction between blue and red systems. Two-day-old, dark-grown seedlings were transferred to custom LED chambers containing blue and red light (2.70 µmol m2 s1) or identical blue and red conditions supplemented with GL (4.58 µmol m2 s1). A foil-wrapped set of seedlings was included to assess dark-growth rate and verify growth inhibition. Transfer of dark-grown seedlings to the experimental light conditions was performed to ensure that different light conditions did not cause variation in germination that could be misinterpreted as differences in end-point length. Seedling height was recorded at 96 h (poststratification). The results are presented in Figure 8. Figure 8A displays the mean hypocotyl length of many (>40) individual seedlings grown under each of the three conditions. The data indicate that the red and blue treatment decreases end-point hypocotyl length by 30.7% (±3.1%) relative to dark-grown controls. Addition of GL opposes blue and red light-mediated inhibition, as seedlings are only 15.1% (±4.0%) shorter than dark controls, despite the fact that the photon fluence rate was higher under GL-supplemented conditions. Figure 8B shows the actual light spectra measured in each chamber.
The most salient feature of the seedling's etiolated growth program is the rapidly elongating hypocotyl. It has always been assumed that this rate defined a default statea seedling growing as rapidly as possible to move through soil in search of light. However, this study shows that seedlings sense GL to direct an increase in their growth rate, at times approaching 150% the rate observed in the dark-grown seedling. The larger implication is that this is not just a curious artifact of the monochromatic laboratory environment but instead is a biologically relevant response possibly mediated through an uncharacterized photomorphogenic system that shapes plant form during the first hours of light sensing and seedling establishment. Regardless of mechanism, it is clear that the effects of GL must be considered for a complete understanding of light signaling and integration.
The fact that blue, red, and far-red signals inhibit stem growth, yet GL promotes stem growth, reiterates the concept that seedling growth rate in light is a compromise between multiple systems that simultaneously suppress and promote expansion of hypocotyl cells (Parks et al., 2001a
Promotion of stem growth by GL has been observed in studies of the action spectra of stem growth responses. Goto et al. (1993)
The antagonistic role of GL signals is reflected in the literature. It has been observed in tomato (Went, 1957
Genetic analyses indicate that GL-stimulated stem elongation also cannot be completely attributed to any known photoreceptors. Mutations in the cryptochromes, phototropins, and the major phytochromes do not eliminate the GL response. To the contrary, high-fluence GL treatment led to a transient inhibition of growth rate that was detectable between 20 to 35 min (Fig. 3D). The observed inhibition was shown to be the effect of a subset (or all) of the phototropin and cryptochrome receptors (Fig. 6, A and B). A recent study has shown that phot1 mediates a transient decrease in stem elongation rate following low-fluence blue light irradiation (Folta et al., 2003b
Genetic analyses indicate that phyA and phyB participate in the GL response. Under constant dim GL, both phyA and phyB act redundantly in regulating the normal timing of the GL response (Figs. 5D and 6C). The response is delayed in phyB, phyAphyB, and hy1 mutants. Growth promotion, usually apparent at 10 to 15 min, is not clear until 20 to 25 min and only reaches on average approximately 75% of the normal amplitude. The participation of phyA and phyB in this response precedes translocation of phyA and phyB into the nucleus (Hisada et al., 2000
Genetic tests establish that phytochromes influence the response to GL, but are they redundantly mediating the response? It is unclear how GL may activate phytochrome to respond in a manner completely at opposition to its well-documented effects on growth inhibition (Mandoli and Briggs, 1981
The question of phytochrome redundancy (as well as coaction with blue light sensors) in the GL response can also be tested in end-point experiments that measure the effect of GL on stem growth in the presence of saturating fluences of red and blue light. Figure 8 presents the results that indicate that supplemental GL antagonizes the inhibitory effects of red and blue light. Under these conditions the phytochromes, cryptochromes, and phototropins are activated by their optimal wavebands, yet the effect of GL is still observed. It is formally possible that GL reverses an active photoreceptor through stimulation of a blue light-generated flavin-semiquinone chromophore akin to the photoreversibility observed in phytochrome responses. This outcome is unlikely as overexpression of CRY1 has been shown to enhance growth inhibition in response to blue and green light (Lin et al., 1995a
It is exciting to speculate that a yet-uncharacterized photoreceptor generates the response to GL. Zeiger and colleagues have proposed that the blue light-mediated stomatal opening involves a carotenoid photoreceptor (Zeiger, 2000 Practical by-products of this work directly apply to plant research and propagation. This work certainly reiterates that extreme care be exercised in the use of green safelights in photobiological studies. A brief 102 µmol m2 GL pulse is capable of generating a significant change in plant growth rate. Since growth is affected it is likely that gene expression patterns have changed as well, either as a direct consequence of the GL-signaling pathway or as an indirect product in response to the mechanical signals generated by elongating cells. Of equal importance, the addition or depletion of GL may be a means to manipulate seedling establishment, growth, and stature in artificial lighting environments. Fluorescent bulbs emit three principle wavebands, approximately equal fluences of blue, red, and green light that are perceived by the human brain as white. Filtering or supplementing GL may be a useful tool to affect plant growth in general or regulate progression through key developmental stages. These concepts, as well as tests of interaction between GL and other photosensory systems, are ongoing and will determine the biologically relevant effects of GL on controlling plant development through the transition to the light environment.
Plant Materials
All genotypes tested are identical to those previously assessed for blue light responses: cry1-304 (Mockler et al., 1999
High-resolution image capture and analysis were performed as described (Parks and Spalding, 1999
Actinic GL was supplied by one of two sources, each producing similar results. The first was a single Philips (Eindhoven, The Netherlands) Cool Home Light fluorescent bulb wrapped with three layers of green cellulose-acetate theatrical gel (M-124; Cinemills, Burbank, CA), producing peak emission at 534 with an approximate 20 nm half-bandwidth (used for Fig. 2). The second was a green LED array (S10-30 or R30-123; Ledtronics, Torrance, CA) passed through a transparent green plastic filter resulting in a peak emission at 525 nm and a 16 nm half-bandwidth and was used for both low- and high-fluence rate experiments (Figs. 38
Wild-type (Col-0) and mutant (cry1cry2) seeds were stratified for 48 h at 4°C and then were treated with a single 1-h pulse of florescent white light (16 µmol m2 s1). Seedlings began to germinate after approximately 40 h in darkness. At this point the emerging seedlings (23 mm with a tightly closed hook) were transferred to vertical agar plates and were imaged as described (Parks and Spalding, 1999
The data in Figure 7 were derived from analysis of 2-d-old, dark-grown seedlings transferred to dim-red light (23 x 102 µmol m2 s1) for 2 to 5 h prior to the GL pulse. Red light was generated from a Quantum Devices (Barneveld, WI) Q-Beam LED array. The data in Figure 8 were obtained from 2-d-old, dark-grown seedlings grown on 0.5x Murashige and Skoog media (pH 5.8) with 1.5 mM MES and 1% Suc, solidified with 1% phytagar (RPI, Mt. Prospect, IL). Custom LED arrays were built from commercially available electronics parts and allowed precise control of individual blue (470 nm), red (630 nm), and green (525 nm) fluence rates. Diagrams of the arrays, method of construction, and their spectral ranges are presented online at www.arabidopsisthaliana.com/lightboxes.
I thank Dustin Kenitz for assistance in design and assembly of the custom LED arrays and Dawn Bies for critical reading of this manuscript. Received January 13, 2004; returned for revision April 30, 2004; accepted May 19, 2004.
1 This work was supported by the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, initiated with support from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (postdoctoral award 20013530410851), completed with support from NASA-SABRE (NAG10316), and approved for publication as Journal Series Number R10303. Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.104.038893. * E-mail kfolta{at}ifas.ufl.edu; fax 3523925653.
Ahmad M, Grancher N, Heil M, Black RC, Giovani B, Galland P, Lardemer D (2002) Action spectrum for cryptochrome-dependent hypocotyl growth inhibition in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 129: 774785
Chory J, Peto CA, Ashbaugh M, Saganich R, Pratt L, Ausubel F (1989) Different roles for phytochrome in etiolated and green plants deduced from characterization of Arabidopsis thaliana mutants. Plant Cell 1: 867880
Christie JM, Reymond P, Powell GK, Bernasconi P, Raibekas AA, Liscum E, Briggs WR (1998) Arabidopsis NPH1: a flavoprotein with the properties of a photoreceptor for phototropism. Science 282: 16981701
Davis SJ, Kurepa J, Vierstra RD (1999) The Arabidopsis thaliana HY1 locus, required for phytochrome-chromophore biosynthesis, encodes a protein related to heme oxygenases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 65416546
Eisinger WR, Bogomolni RA, Taiz L (2003) Interactions between a blue-green reversible photoreceptor and a separate UV-B receptor in stomatal guard cells. Am J Bot 90: 15601566
Fankhauser C, Yeh KC, Lagarias JC, Zhang H, Elich TD, Chory J (1999) PKS1, a substrate phosphorylated by phytochrome that modulates light signaling in Arabidopsis. Science 284: 15391541
Folta KM, Leig EJ, Durham T, Spalding EP (2003b) Primary inhibition of hypocotyl growth and phototropism depend differently on phototropin-mediated increases in cytoplasmic calcium induced by blue light. Plant Physiol 133: 14641470 Folta KM, Pontin MA, Karlin-Neumann G, Bottini R, Spalding EP (2003a) Genomic and physiological studies demonstrate roles for auxin and gibberellin in the early phase of cryptochrome 1 action in blue light. Plant J 36: 203214[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Folta KM, Spalding EP (2001b) Opposing roles of phytochrome A and phytochrome B in early cryptochrome-mediated growth inhibition. Plant J 28: 333340[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Folta KM, Spalding EP (2001a) Unexpected roles for cryptochrome 2 and phototropin revealed by high-resolution analysis of blue light-mediated hypocotyl growth inhibition. Plant J 26: 471478[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Frechilla S, Talbott LD, Bogomolni RA, Zeiger E (2000) Reversal of blue light-stimulated stomatal opening by green light. Plant Cell Physiol 41: 171176
Frechilla S, Zhu J, Talbott LD, Zeiger E (1999) Stomata from npq1, a zeaxanthin-less Arabidopsis mutant, lack a specific response to blue light. Plant Cell Physiol 40: 949954
Gaba V, Black M, Attridge TH (1984) Photocontrol of hypocotyl elongation in de-etiolated Cucumis sativus L. Long-term fluence rate-dependent responses to blue light. Plant Physiol 74: 897900 Gaba V, Black M, Canaani O, Attridge TH (1991) Photocontrol of hypocotyl elongation in light-grown Cucumis-sativus L. photosynthetic requirement for a fluence rate dependent phytochrome response. Photochem Photobiol 53: 399405 Goto N, Yamamoto KT, Watanabe M (1993) Action spectra for inhibition of hypocotyl growth of wild-type plants and of the hy2 long-hypocotyl mutant of Arabidopsis-thaliana L. Photochem Photobiol 57: 867871
Guo H, Yang H, Mockler TC, Lin C (1998) Regulation of flowering time by Arabidopsis photoreceptors. Science 279: 13601363 Hanke J, Hartmann KM, Mohr H (1969) Effects of night breaks on flowering of Sinapis alba L. Planta 86: 235249
Hisada A, Hanzawa H, Weller JL, Nagatani A, Reid JB, Furuya M (2000) Light-induced nuclear translocation of endogenous pea phytochrome A visualized by immunocytochemical procedures. Plant Cell 12: 10631078
Huala E, Oeller PW, Liscum E, Han IS, Larsen E, Briggs WR (1997) Arabidopsis NPH1: a protein kinase with a putative redox-sensing domain. Science 278: 21202123
Kagawa T, Sakai T, Suetsugu N, Oikawa K, Ishiguro S, Kato T, Tabata S, Okada K, Wada M (2001) Arabidopsis NPL1: a phototropin homolog controlling the chloroplast high-light avoidance response. Science 291: 21382141
Kigel J, Cosgrove DJ (1991) Photoinhibition of stem elongation by blue and red light: effects on hydraulic and cell wall properties. Plant Physiol 95: 10491056
Kircher S, Gil P, Kozma-Bognar L, Fejes E, Speth V, Husselstein-Muller T, Bauer D, Adam E, Schafer E, Nagy F (2002) Nucleocytoplasmic partitioning of the plant photoreceptors phytochrome A, B, C, D, and E is regulated differentially by light and exhibits a diurnal rhythm. Plant Cell 14: 15411555
Klein RM (1964) Repression of tissue culture growth by visible and near visible radiation. Plant Physiol 39: 536539
Klein RM (1979) Reversible effects of green and orange-red radiation on plant cell elongation. Plant Physiol 63: 114116 Klein RM (1992) Effects of green light on biological systems. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 67: 199284[Medline]
Klein RM, Edsall PC, Gentile AC (1965) Effects of near ultraviolet and green radiations on plant growth. Plant Physiol 40: 903906
Lin C, Ahmad M, Gordon D, Cashmore AR (1995a) Expression of an Arabidopsis cryptochrome gene in transgenic tobacco results in hypersensitivity to blue, UV-A, and green light. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 84238427
Lin C, Robertson DE, Ahmad M, Raibekas AA, Jorns MS, Dutton PL, Cashmore AR (1995b) Association of flavin adenine dinucleotide with the Arabidopsis blue light receptor CRY1. Science 269: 968970 Liscum E, Briggs WR (1995) Mutations in the NPH1 locus of Arabidopsis disrupt the perception of phototropic stimuli. Plant Cell 7: 473485[Abstract]
Ma L, Li J, Qu L, Hager J, Chen Z, Zhao H, Deng XW (2001) Light control of Arabidopsis development entails coordinated regulation of genome expression and cellular pathways. Plant Cell 13: 25892607
Mandoli DF, Briggs WR (1981) Phytochrome control of 2 low-irradiance responses in etiolated oat seedlings. Plant Physiol 67: 733739 Meijer G (1968) Rapid growth inhibition of gherkin hypocotyls in blue light. Acta Bot Neerl 17: 914 Mockler TC, Guo H, Yang H, Duong H, Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of floral induction. Development 126: 20732082[Abstract]
Muramoto T, Kohchi T, Yokota A, Hwang I, Goodman HM (1999) The Arabidopsis photomorphogenic mutant hy1 is deficient in phytochrome chromophore biosynthesis as a result of a mutation in a plastid heme oxygenase. Plant Cell 11: 335348 Nagatani A, Reed JW, Chory J (1993) Isolation and initial characterization of Arabidopsis mutants that are deficient in phytochrome A. Plant Physiol 102: 269277[Abstract] Ogawa T (1981) Blue light response of stomata with starch-containing (Vicia faba) and starch-deficient (Allium cepa) guard cells under background illumination with red light. Plant Science Letters 22: 103108<[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Parks BM, Cho MH, Spalding EP (1998) Two genetically separable phases of growth inhibition induced by blue light in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant Physiol 118: 609615 Parks BM, Folta KM, Spalding EP (2001a) Photocontrol of stem growth. Curr Opin Plant Biol 4: 436440[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Parks BM, Hoecker U, Spalding EP (2001b) Light-induced growth promotion by SPA1 counteracts phytochrome-mediated growth inhibition during de-etiolation. Plant Physiol 126: 12911298
Parks BM, Quail PH (1991) Phytochrome-deficient hy1 and hy2 long hypocotyl mutants of Arabidopsis are defective in phytochrome chromophore biosynthesis. Plant Cell 3: 11771186
Parks BM, Spalding EP (1999) Sequential and coordinated action of phytochromes A and B during Arabidopsis stem growth revealed by kinetic analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 1414214146
Pepper AE, Seong-Kim M, Hebst SM, Ivey KN, Kwak SJ, Broyles DE (2001) shl, a new set of Arabidopsis mutants with exaggerated developmental responses to available red, far-red, and blue light. Plant Physiol 127: 295304 Reed JW, Nagpal P, Poole DS, Furuya M, Chory J (1993) Mutations in the gene for the red/far-red light receptor phytochrome B alter cell elongation and physiological responses throughout Arabidopsis development. Plant Cell 5: 147157[Abstract]
Reymond P, Short TW, Briggs WR, Poff KL (1992) Light-induced phosphorylation of a membrane protein plays an early role in signal transduction for phototropism in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 47184721 Shalitin D, Yang H, Mockler TC, Maymon M, Guo H, Whitelam GC, Lin C (2002) Regulation of Arabidopsis cryptochrome 2 by blue-light-dependent phosphorylation. Nature 417: 763767[CrossRef][Medline] Spalding EP, Cosgrove DJ (1989) Large plasma-membrane depolarization precedes rapid blue-light-induced growth inhibition in cucumber. Planta 178: 407410[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Steinitz B, Ren ZL, Poff KL (1985) Blue and green light-induced phototropism in Arabidopsis-thaliana and Lactuca-sativa L. seedlings Plant Physiol 77: 248251
Swartz TE, Corchnoy SB, Christie JM, Lewis JW, Szundi I, Briggs WR, Bogomolni RA (2001) The photocycle of a flavin-binding domain of the blue light photoreceptor phototropin. J Biol Chem 276: 3649336500
Talbott LD, Nikolova G, Ortiz A, Shmayevich I, Zeiger E (2002) Green light reversal of blue-light-stimulated stomatal opening is found in a diversity of plant species. Am J Bot 89: 366368
Talbott LD, Shmayevich IJ, Chung Y, Hammad JW, Zeiger E (2003) Blue light and phytochrome-mediated stomatal opening in the npq1 and phot1 phot2 mutants of Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 133: 15221529
Tepperman JM, Zhu T, Chang HS, Wang X, Quail PH (2001) Multiple transcription-factor genes are early targets of phytochrome A signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 94379442 Went FW (1957) The Experimental Control of Plant Growth. Chronica Botanica, Waltham, MA Young JC, Liscum E, Hangarter RP (1992) Spectral-dependence of light-inhibited hypocotyl elongation in photomorphogenic mutants of Arabidopsis: evidence for a UV-a photosensor. Planta 188: 106114[CrossRef][Web of Science] Zeiger E (2000) Sensory transduction of blue light in guard cells. Trends Plant Sci 5: 183185[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Related articles in Plant Physiol.:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|