Branching gene expression during chrysanthemum axillary bud outgrowth regulated by strigolactone and auxin transport

Shoot branching is essential in ornamental chrysanthemum production and determines final plant shape and quality. Auxin is associated with apical dominance to indirectly inhibit bud outgrowth. Two non-mutually exclusive models exist for indirect auxin inhibition. Basipetal auxin transport inhibits axillary bud outgrowth by limiting auxin export from buds to stem (canalization model) or by increasing strigolactone levels (second messenger model). Here we analyzed bud outgrowth in treatments with auxin (IAA), strigolactone (GR24) and auxin transport inhibitor (NPA) using a split-plate bioassay with isolated chrysanthemum stem segments. Besides measuring bud length, dividing cell percentage was measured with flow cytometry and RT-qPCR was used to monitor expression levels of genes involved in auxin transport (CmPIN1) and signaling (CmAXR2), bud dormancy (CmBRC1, CmDRM1) and strigolactone biosynthesis (CmMAX1, CmMAX3). Treatments over a 5-day period showed bud outgrowth in the control and inhibition with IAA and IAA?+?GR24. Bud outgrowth in the control coincided with high dividing cell percentage, decreased expression of CmBRC1 and CmDRM1 and increased CmPIN1 expression. Inhibition by IAA and IAA?+?GR24 coincided with low dividing cell percentage and unchanged or increased expressions of CmBRC1, CmDRM1 and CmPIN1. Treatment with GR24 showed restricted bud outgrowth that was counteracted by NPA. This restricted bud outgrowth was still concomitant with a high dividing cell percentage and coincided with decreased expression of dormancy genes. These results indicate incomplete inhibition of bud outgrowth by GR24 treatment and suggest involvement of auxin transport in the mechanism of bud inhibition by strigolactones, supporting the canalization model.     

Strigolactone Acts Downstream of Auxin to Regulate Bud Outgrowth in Pea and Arabidopsis

During the last century, two key hypotheses have been proposed to explain apical dominance in plants: auxin promotes the production of a second messenger that moves up into buds to repress their outgrowth, and auxin saturation in the stem inhibits auxin transport from buds, thereby inhibiting bud outgrowth. The recent discovery of strigolactone as the novel shoot-branching inhibitor allowed us to test its mode of action in relation to these hypotheses. We found that exogenously applied strigolactone inhibited bud outgrowth in pea (Pisum sativum) even when auxin was depleted after decapitation. We also found that strigolactone application reduced branching in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) auxin response mutants, suggesting that auxin may act through strigolactones to facilitate apical dominance. Moreover, strigolactone application to tiny buds of mutant or decapitated pea plants rapidly stopped outgrowth, in contrast to applying N-1-naphthylphthalamic acid (NPA), an auxin transport inhibitor, which significantly slowed growth only after several days. Whereas strigolactone or NPA applied to growing buds reduced bud length, only NPA blocked auxin transport in the bud. Wild-type and strigolactone biosynthesis mutant pea and Arabidopsis shoots were capable of instantly transporting additional amounts of auxin in excess of endogenous levels, contrary to predictions of auxin transport models. These data suggest that strigolactone does not act primarily by affecting auxin transport from buds. Rather, the primary repressor of bud outgrowth appears to be the auxin-dependent production of strigolactones.     

Response to strigolactone treatment in chrysanthemum axillary buds is influenced by auxin transport inhibition and sucrose availability

Axillary bud outgrowth is regulated by both environmental cues and internal plant hormone signaling. Central to this regulation is the balance between auxins, cytokinins, and strigolactones. Auxins are transported basipetally and inhibit the axillary bud outgrowth indirectly by either restricting auxin export from the axillary buds to the stem (canalization model) or inducing strigolactone biosynthesis and limiting cytokinin levels (second messenger model). Both models have supporting evidence and are not mutually exclusive. In this study, we used a modified split-plate bioassay to apply different plant growth regulators to isolated stem segments of chrysanthemum and measure their effect on axillary bud growth. Results showed axillary bud outgrowth in the bioassay within 5 days after nodal stem excision. Treatments with apical auxin (IAA) inhibited bud outgrowth which was counteracted by treatments with basal cytokinins (TDZ, zeatin, 2-ip). Treatments with basal strigolactone (GR24) could inhibit axillary bud growth without an apical auxin treatment. GR24 inhibition of axillary buds could be counteracted with auxin transport inhibitors (TIBA and NPA). Treatments with sucrose in the medium resulted in stronger axillary bud growth, which could be inhibited with apical auxin treatment but not with basal strigolactone treatment. These observations provide support for both the canalization model and the second messenger model with, on the one hand, the influence of auxin transport on strigolactone inhibition of axillary buds and, on the other hand, the inhibition of axillary bud growth by strigolactone without an apical auxin source. The inability of GR24 to inhibit bud growth in a sucrose treatment raises an interesting question about the role of strigolactone and sucrose in axillary bud outgrowth and calls for further investigation.     

Cytokinin/Auxin Control of Apical Dominance in Ipomoea nil

Although the concept of apical dominance control by the ratioof cytokinin to auxin is not new, recent experimentation withtransgenic plants has given this concept renewed attention.In the present study, it has been demonstrated that cytokinintreatments can partially reverse the inhibitory effect of auxinon lateral bud outgrowth in intact shoots of Ipomoea nil. Althoughless conclusive, this also appeared to occur in buds of isolatednodes. Auxin inhibited lateral bud outgrowth when applied eitherto the top of the stump of the decapitated shoot or directlyto the bud itself. However, the fact that cytokinin promotiveeffects on bud outgrowth are known to occur when cytokinin isapplied directly to the bud suggests different transport tissuesand/or sites of action for the two hormones. Cytokinin antagonistswere shown in some experiments to have a synergistic effectwith benzyladenine on the promotion of bud outgrowth. If theratio of cytokinin to auxin does control apical dominance, thenthe next critical question is how do these hormones interactin this correlative process? The hypothesis that shoot-derivedauxin inhibits lateral bud outgrowth indirectly by depletingcytokinin content in the shoots via inhibition of its productionin the roots was not supported in the present study which demonstratedthat the repressibility of lateral bud outgrowth by auxin treatmentsat various positions on the shoot was not correlated with proximityto the roots but rather with proximity to the buds. Resultsalso suggested that auxin in subtending mature leaves as wellas that in the shoot apex and adjacent small leaves may contributeto the apical dominance of a shoot. (Received September 24, 1996; Accepted March 16, 1997)     

Roles for Auxin, Cytokinin, and Strigolactone in Regulating Shoot Branching

Many processes have been described in the control of shoot branching. Apical dominance is defined as the control exerted by the shoot tip on the outgrowth of axillary buds, whereas correlative inhibition includes the suppression of growth by other growing buds or shoots. The level, signaling, and/or flow of the plant hormone auxin in stems and buds is thought to be involved in these processes. In addition, RAMOSUS (RMS) branching genes in pea (Pisum sativum) control the synthesis and perception of a long-distance inhibitory branching signal produced in the stem and roots, a strigolactone or product. Auxin treatment affects the expression of RMS genes, but it is unclear whether the RMS network can regulate branching independently of auxin. Here, we explore whether apical dominance and correlative inhibition show independent or additive effects in rms mutant plants. Bud outgrowth and branch lengths are enhanced in decapitated and stem-girdled rms mutants compared with intact control plants. This may relate to an RMS-independent induction of axillary bud outgrowth by these treatments. Correlative inhibition was also apparent in rms mutant plants, again indicating an RMS-independent component. Treatments giving reductions in RMS1 and RMS5 gene expression, auxin transport, and auxin level in the main stem were not always sufficient to promote bud outgrowth. We suggest that this may relate to a failure to induce the expression of cytokinin biosynthesis genes, which always correlated with bud outgrowth in our treatments. We present a new model that accounts for apical dominance, correlative inhibition, RMS gene action, and auxin and cytokinin and their interactions in controlling the progression of buds through different control points from dormancy to sustained growth.     

Auxin inhibition of decapitation-induced branching is dependent on graft-transmissible signals regulated by genes Rms1 and Rms2

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.     

Models of long-distance transport: how is carrier-dependent auxin transport regulated in the stem?

? This paper presents two models of carrier-dependent long-distance auxin transport in stems that represent the process at different scales. ? A simple compartment model using a single constant auxin transfer rate produced similar data to those observed in biological experiments. The effects of different underlying biological assumptions were tested in a more detailed model representing cellular and intracellular processes that enabled discussion of different patterns of carrier-dependent auxin transport and signalling. ? The output that best fits the biological data is produced by a model where polar auxin transport is not limited by the number of transporters/carriers and hence supports biological data showing that stems have considerable excess capacity to transport auxin. ? All results support the conclusion that auxin depletion following apical decapitation in pea (Pisum sativum) occurs too slowly to be the initial cause of bud outgrowth. Consequently, changes in auxin content in the main stem and changes in polar auxin transport/carrier abundance in the main stem are not correlated with axillary bud outgrowth.     

Execution of the auxin replacement apical dominance experiment in temperate woody species

The classic Thimann-Skoog or auxin replacement apical dominance test of exogenous auxin repression of lateral bud outgrowth was successfully executed in both seedlings and older trees of white ash, green ash, and red oak under the following conditions: (1) decapitation of a twig apex and auxin replacement were carried out during spring flush, (2) the decapitation was in the previous season's overwintered wood, and (3) the point of decapitation was below the upper large irrepressible lateral buds but above the lower repressible lateral buds. Although it has been suggested that neither auxin, the terminal bud, nor apical dominance have control over the outgrowth of the irrepressible buds during spring flush, there is evidence in the present study that indicates that such control over the repressible buds exists. In seedlings, second-order branching, which resulted from decapitation of elongating current shoots, was also inhibited by exogenous auxin in the three species. Hence, the auxin replacement experiments did work on year-old proleptic buds (of branches of older trees) that would have entered the bud bank and also on current buds of seedlings. Cytokinin treatments were ineffectual in promoting bud growth.     

Molecular role of cytokinin in bud activation and outgrowth in apple branching based on transcriptomic analysis

Key message

Axillary bud activation and outgrowth were dependent on local cytokinin, and that bud activation preceded the activation of cell cycle and cell growth genes in apple branching.

Abstract

Cytokinin is often applied to apple trees to produce more shoot branches in apple seedlings. The molecular response of apple to the application of cytokinin, and the relationship between bud activation and cell cycle in apple branching, however, are poorly understood. In this study, RNA sequencing was used to characterize differential expression genes in axillary buds of 1-year grafted “Fuji” apple at 4 and 96 h after cytokinin application. And comparative gene expression analyses were performed in buds of decapitated shoots and buds of the treatment of biosynthetic inhibitor of cytokinin (Lovastatin) on decapitated shoots. Results indicated that decapitation and cytokinin increased ZR content in buds and internodes at 4–8 h, and induced bud elongation at 96 h after treatment, relative to buds in shoots receiving the Lovastatin treatment. RNA-seq analysis indicated that differential expression genes in auxin and cytokinin signal transduction were significantly enriched at 4 h, and DNA replication was enriched at 96 h. Cytokinin-responsive type-A response regulator, auxin polar transport, and axillary meristem-related genes were up-regulated at 4 h in the cytokinin and decapitation treatments, while qRT-PCR analysis showed that cell cycle and cell growth genes were up-regulated after 8 h. Collectively, the data indicated that bud activation and outgrowth might be dependent on local cytokinin synthesis in axillary buds or stems, and that bud activation preceded the activation of cell cycle genes during the outgrowth of ABs in apple shoots.

     

The Arabidopsis MAX pathway controls shoot branching by regulating auxin transport

BACKGROUND: Plants achieve remarkable plasticity in shoot system architecture by regulating the activity of secondary shoot meristems, laid down in the axil of each leaf. Axillary meristem activity, and hence shoot branching, is regulated by a network of interacting hormonal signals that move through the plant. Among these, auxin, moving down the plant in the main stem, indirectly inhibits axillary bud outgrowth, and an as yet undefined hormone, the synthesis of which in Arabidopsis requires MAX1, MAX3, and MAX4, moves up the plant and also inhibits shoot branching. Since the axillary buds of max4 mutants are resistant to the inhibitory effects of apically supplied auxin, auxin and the MAX-dependent hormone must interact to inhibit branching. RESULTS: Here we show that the resistance of max mutant buds to apically supplied auxin is largely independent of the known, AXR1-mediated, auxin signal transduction pathway. Instead, it is caused by increased capacity for auxin transport in max primary stems, which show increased expression of PIN auxin efflux facilitators. The max phenotype is dependent on PIN1 activity, but it is independent of flavonoids, which are known regulators of PIN-dependent auxin transport. CONCLUSIONS: The MAX-dependent hormone is a novel regulator of auxin transport. Modulation of auxin transport in the stem is sufficient to regulate bud outgrowth, independent of AXR1-mediated auxin signaling. We therefore propose an additional mechanism for long-range signaling by auxin in which bud growth is regulated by competition between auxin sources for auxin transport capacity in the primary stem.     

The role of hormones in apical dominance. New approaches to an old problem in plant development

The role of hormones in apical dominance has been under investigation with traditional 'spray and weigh' methods for nearly 5 decades. Even though the precision of hormone content analyses in tissue has greatly improved in recent years, there have been no significant breakthroughs in our understanding of the action mechanism of this classical developmental response. Auxin appears to inhibit axillary bud outgrowth whereas cytokinins will often promote it. Conclusive evidence for a direct role of these or other hormones in apical dominance has not been forthcoming. However, promising new tools and approaches recently have begun to be utilized. The manipulation of endogenous hormone levels via the use of transgenic plants transformed with bacterial genes ( iaaM and ipt from Agrobacterium tumefaciens and iaaL from Pseudomonas syringae pv. savastanoi ) has demonstrated powerful effects of auxin and cytokinin on axillary bud outgrowth. Also, possible auxin and cytokinin involvement of rolB and C genes from Agrobacterium rhizogenes whose activity is associated with reduced apical dominance in dicotyledons has received considerable attention. The characterization of unique mRNAs and proteins in non-growing and growing lateral buds before and after apical dominance release is helping to lay the groundwork for the elucidation of signal transduction and cell cycle regulation in this response. The use of auxin-deficient, and auxin/ethylene-resistant mutants has provided another approach for analyzing the role of these hormones. The presumed eventual employment of molecular assay systems (SAUR/GH3 promoters fused with GUS reporter gene) which are presently being developed for analyzing auxin localized in lateral buds will hopefully provide a critical test for the direct auxin inhibition hypothesis.     

Competitive canalization of PIN-dependent auxin flow from axillary buds controls pea bud outgrowth

Shoot branching is one of the major determinants of plant architecture. Polar auxin transport in stems is necessary for the control of bud outgrowth by a dominant apex. Here, we show that following decapitation in pea (Pisum sativum L.), the axillary buds establish directional auxin export by subcellular polarization of PIN auxin transporters. Apical auxin application on the decapitated stem prevents this PIN polarization and canalization of laterally applied auxin. These results support a model in which the apical and lateral auxin sources compete for primary channels of auxin transport in the stem to control the outgrowth of axillary buds.     

Apical dominance

Apical dominance is the control exerted by the apical portions of the shoot over the outgrowth of the lateral buds. The classical explanations for correlative inhibition have focused on hormone/nutrient hypotheses. The remarkable progress that has been made in the technology of endogenous hormone quantification in plant tissue has not been accompanied by comparable progress in the elucidation of mechanisms of hormone action in apical dominance. Evidence from hormonal studies suggests that apically produced auxin indirectly suppresses axillary bud outgrowth that is promoted by cytokinin originating from roots/shoots. Significant involvement with other hormones, although less likely, has not been ruled out. Possible changes in tissue sensitivity to hormones should not be overlooked. Auxin-induced oligosaccharide signals originating from the cell walls of shoot tips or polyamines may function as secondary inhibitors to bud growth. Alternatively, apically produced auxin may suppress lateral bud growth by inhibiting auxin export from these buds. Support for a critical role for nutrients in apical dominance keeps resurfacing, especially for auxin-directed nutrient transport and for water as a possible inducing signal for bud outgrowth. Histological and biochemical analyses of lateral buds recently released from apical dominance are urgently needed. The feasibility of manipulating endogenous auxin/cytokinin content in plant tissue by gene insertion and modulation opens the door to exciting approaches as does the use of hormone insensitive/resistant mutants. There is also need to recognize the existence of variability of apical dominance mechanisms among different plant types. The aesthetic and economic implications of understanding apical dominance for the modification of plant structure and form are extremely significant.     

Concepts and terminology of apical dominance

Apical dominance is the control exerted by the shoot apex over lateral bud outgrowth. The concepts and terminology associated with apical dominance as used by various plant scientists sometimes differ, which may lead to significant misconceptions. Apical dominance and its release may be divided into four developmental stages: (I) lateral bud formation, (II) imposition of inhibition on lateral bud growth, (III) release of apical dominance following decapitation, and (IV) branch shoot development. Particular emphasis is given to discriminating between Stage III, which is accompanied by initial bud outgrowth during the first few hours of release and may be promoted by cytokinin and inhibited by auxin, and Stage IV, which is accompanied by subsequent bud outgrowth occurring days or weeks after decapitation and which may be promoted by auxin and gibberellin. The importance of not interpreting data measured in Stage IV on the basis of conditions and processes occurring in Stage III is discussed as well as the correlation between degree of branching and endogenous auxin content, branching mutants, the quantification of apical dominance in various species (including Arabidopsis ), and apical control in trees.     

The effect of decapitation on the levels of IAA and ABA in the lateral buds of Betula pendula roth

The level of IAA and ABA in lateral buds of birch shoots 24 h and 5 days after the decapitation of the apical bud was determined. Twenty four hours after decapitation, when visible signs of outgrowth of lateral buds were not observed yet, an increase in the level of IAA and a decrease of ABA, as compared with the buds of non-decapitated shoots, was found. Five days later, when lateral buds were in the period of intensive outgrowth, a decrease in the levels of IAA and ABA was observed. It has been suggested that removing the source of auxin, by the decapitation of the apical bud makes possible the lateral buds to undertake the synthesis of their own auxin. It could lead to the decrease in the content of ABA. These all events could create suitable conditions for the outgrowth of lateral shoots.     

植物茎分枝的分子调控

植物茎分枝结构决定了不同植物的不同形态结构.本文从腋生分生组织的发生、腋芽的生长两个方面综述了近年来植物分枝发生发育相关的分子机理研究及其进展.发现在不同植物中腋分生组织形成的基本机制是相似的,LS（lateral suppressor）及其同源基因在不同植物中都参与腋生分生组织的形成,而BL(blind)及其同源基因也参与调控腋生分生组织的形成.腋生分生组织的形成可能也是受激素调控的.目前,对腋芽生长的分子调控机制的认识主要集中于生长素通过二级信使的作用调控腋芽的生长.而生长素调控腋芽生长的机制已经较为清楚的有两条途径：一是生长素通过抑制细胞分裂素合成来调控腋芽的生长;另一途径是一种类胡萝卜素衍生的信号物质参与生长素的运输调控(MAX途径)来调控腋芽的生长.最新研究表明,TB1的拟南芥同源基因在MAX途径的下游负调控腋芽的生长.此外,增强表达OsNAC2也促进腋芽的生长.