Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24904042›Full record

ArticlePlant physiology2014

Conditional Auxin Response and Differential Cytokinin Profiles in Shoot Branching Mutants.

Naomi F Young, Brett J Ferguson, Ioanna Antoniadi, Mark H Bennett, Christine A Beveridge, Colin G N Turnbull

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant physiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. HPeerJ · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Lessons from a century of apical dominance research.Journal of experimental botany · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. How Strigolactone Shapes Shoot Architecture.Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Naomi F YoungDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Brett J FergusonDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Ioanna AntoniadiDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Mark H BennettDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Christine A BeveridgeDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Colin G N TurnbullDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom (N.F.Y., I.A., M.H.B., C.G.N.T.); andAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research (B.J.F.) and School of Biological Sciences (C.A.B.), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia c.turnbull@imperial.ac.uk.
University of Queensland · AUImperial College London · GBAustralian Research Council · AU

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council P18282
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Strigolactone (SL), auxin, and cytokinin (CK) are hormones that interact to regulate shoot branching. For example, several ramosus (rms) branching mutants in pea (Pisum sativum) have SL defects, perturbed xylem CK levels, and diminished responses to auxin in shoot decapitation assays. In contrast with the last of these characteristics, we discovered that buds on isolated nodes (explants) of rms plants instead respond normally to auxin. We hypothesized that the presence or absence of attached roots would result in transcriptional and hormonal differences in buds and subtending stem tissues, and might underlie the differential auxin response. However, decapitated plants and explants both showed similar up-regulation of CK biosynthesis genes, increased CK levels, and down-regulation of auxin transport genes. Moreover, auxin application counteracted these trends, regardless of the effectiveness of auxin at inhibiting bud growth. Multivariate analysis revealed that stem transcript and CK changes were largely associated with decapitation and/or root removal and auxin response, whereas bud transcript profiles related more to SL defects. CK clustering profiles were indicative of additional zeatin-type CKs in decapitated stems being supplied by roots and thus promoting bud growth in SL-deficient genotypes even in the presence of added auxin. This difference in CK content may explain why rms buds on explants respond better to auxin than those on decapitated plants. We further conclude that rapid changes in CK status in stems are auxin dependent but largely SL independent, suggesting a model in which auxin and CK are dominant regulators of decapitation-induced branching, whereas SLs are more important in intact plants.

Identifiers

PMID24904042
PMCPMC4119051
OpenAlexW1977581401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.