18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Factors involved in the opening of the hypocotyl hook of cotton and beans.

      Plant physiology

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Conditions influencing the opening of the bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) hypocotyl hook were defined. Such hooks were shown to undergo geotropic curvature; orientation of the hook with respect to gravity greatly affected the observed opening. Cotton and bean hooks behaved exactly opposite in regard to the presence of the cotyledons and apical bud. The cotton hook required the cotyledons for opening, but the corresponding tissue slowed or inhibited opening of the bean hook. With cotton, lower hypocotyl and root tissues stimulated hook opening, but with bean, the tissues below the hook section had little effect. Kinetin and gibberellic acid both modified hook opening in light and dark; the former was inhibitory and the latter was stimulatory. Indoleacetic acid, at concentrations above 10(-5) M, caused pronounced hook closing in red light but not in the dark. These effects were generally the same with both plants. In opening of the cotton hook, the cotyledons were not necessary as a light receptor tissue. None of the growth substances tested were able to substitute completely for the cotton cotyledon. Coumarin was a pronounced inhibitor of opening of the cotton hook, and this response was expressed to such a degree as to cause hook closure with bean tissue. Reduced oxygen levels inhibited hook opening in bean. Oxygen was required in processes subsequent to the light reaction, but not for the photochemical process.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          16657340
          396457
          10.1104/pp.45.5.548

          Comments

          Comment on this article