Advertisement

Biologia Plantarum

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 173–177 | Cite as

The Effects of Photoperiod, Glucose and Gibberellic Acid on Growth In Vitro and Flowering of Chenopodium Murale

  • A. Mitrović
  • B. Živanović
  • Lj. Ćulafić
Article

Abstract

In vitro culture of long-day plant Chenopodium murale L was established. The effects of photoperiod, glucose and gibberellic acid (GA3) on flowering and growth in vitro were investigated. Oscillatory changes of photoperiodic sensitivity were noticeable with regard to plant age. The plants induced at the phase of the 1st and the 3rd pair of leaves flowered to higher degree than those induced at the phase of 2nd pair. Plants induced at the phase of the 1st pair of leaves flowered to 17 % on 5 % glucose-containing medium and the addition of 5 mg dm-3 GA3 resulted in maximum flowering (43 %). Neither glucose nor GA3 were able to compensate for photoperiodic requirements for flowering. Hypocotyl growth was decreased and the 1st internode elongation and development of leaves were increased due to inductive photoperiodic conditions, as compared to non-inductive ones.

hypocotyl elongation 1st internode elongation leaf initiation photoperiodic sensitivity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chailakhyan, M.Ch.: Regulyatsiya Tsveteniya u Vysshikh Rasteniï. [Regulation of flowering in higher plants.]-Nauka, Moscow 1988. [in Russ.]Google Scholar
  2. Ćulafić, Lj.: Induction of flowering of isolated Spinacia oleracea L. buds in sterile culture.-Bull. Inst. Jardin Bot. Univ. Beograd 8: 1–4, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. Cumming, B.G.: Early flowering plants.-In: Will, F.H., Wesselss, N.K. (ed.): Methods in Developmental Biology. Pp. 277–299. Cromwell, T.Y., New York 1967.Google Scholar
  4. Dickens, C.W.S., van Staden, J.: The induction and evocation of flowering in vitro.-Afr. J. Bot. 54: 325–344, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. Durdan, S.F., Herbert, R.J., Rogers, H.J., Francis, D.: Floral determination in the short day plant, Pharbitis nil..-Flowering Newslett. 26: 47–54, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, L.T., King, R.W., Chu, A., Mander, L.N., Pharis, R.P.: Gibberellin structure and florigenic activity in Lolium temulentum, a long-day plant.-Planta 182: 97–106, 1990.Google Scholar
  7. Evans, L.T., King, R.W., Mander, L.N., Pharis, R.P.:-The relative significance for stem elongation and flowering in Lolium temulentum of 3β-hydroxylation of gibberellins.-Planta 192: 130–136, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. Gifford, E.M., Jr., Tepper, H.B.: Histochemical and autoradiographic studies of floral induction in Chenopodium album.-Amer. J. Bot. 49: 706–714, 1962.Google Scholar
  9. Khudairi, A.K., Hamner, K.C.: The relative sensitivity of Xanthium leaves of different ages to photoperiodic induction.-Plant Physiol. 29: 251–257, 1954.Google Scholar
  10. Krekule, J., Macháčková, J., Pavlová, L., Seidlová, F.: Hormonal signals in photoperiodic control of flower initiation.-In: Krekule, J., Seidlová, F. (ed.): Signals in Plant Development. Pp. 145–162. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague 1989.Google Scholar
  11. Lang, A.: Physiology of flower initiation.-In: Ruthland, W. (ed.): Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. Pp. 1380–1536. Springer-Verlag, New York 1965.Google Scholar
  12. Mitrović, A.: In vitro flowering of Chenopodium rubrum L., a short-day plant and Chenopodium murale L., a long-day plant.-Thesis. University of Belgrade, Belgrade 1998.Google Scholar
  13. Mitrović, A., Zivanović, B., Ćulafić, Lj.: The effect of growth regulators on flowering of Chenopodium murale plants in vitro.-Biol. Plant. 43: in press, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. Nitsch, C.: The role of growth regulators in flowering as demonstrated by in vitro techniques.-In: Kaldewey, H., Vardar, Y. (ed.): Hormonal Regulation in Plant Growth and Development. Pp. 413–421. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim 1972.Google Scholar
  15. Pavlová, L., Ullmann, J., Součková, D.: Light conditions of photoperiodic induction of flowering in Chenopodium murale L. ecotype 197-early flowering long-day plant.-Biol. Plant. 31: 381–385, 1989a.Google Scholar
  16. Pavlová, L., Součková, D., Ullmann, J., Krekule, J.: The transition to reproductive phase in Chenopodium murale L. ecotype 197-early flowering long-day plant.-Biol. Plant. 31: 386–391, 1989b.Google Scholar
  17. Pharis, R.P., Evans, L.T., King, R.W., Mander, L.N.: Gibberellins, endogenous and applied, in relation to flower induction in the long-day plant Lolium temulentum.-Plant Physiol. 84: 1132–1138, 1987.Google Scholar
  18. Scorza, R.: In vitro flowering.-Hort. Rev. 4: 106–127, 1982.Google Scholar
  19. Seidlová, F.: Growth regulators in changing apical growth at transition to flowering.-Biol. Plant. 27: 350–359, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. Seidlová, F.: Signals for changing rates and directions of apical growth operating in flowering.-In: Krekule, J., Seidlová, F. (ed.): Signals in Plant Development. Pp. 163–178. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague 1989.Google Scholar
  21. Seidlová, F., Sádliková, H.: Floral transition as a sequence of growth changes in different components of the shoot apical meristem of Chenopodium rubrum.-Biol. Plant. 25: 50–62, 1983.Google Scholar
  22. Thomas, R.G.: Correlations between growth and flowering in Chenopodium amaranticolor. Initiation of leaf and bud primordia.-Ann. Bot. 25: 329–344, 1961.Google Scholar
  23. Ullmann, J., Opatrná, J., Krekule, J., Pavlová, L.: The changes in the growth pattern of organs of Chenopodium rubrum photoperiodicaly induced to flowering.-Biol. Plant. 22: 374–383, 1980.Google Scholar
  24. Wagner, E., Leonhard, J.: Photoperiodische Induktion der Blütenbildung bei Kurtzag-Pflanze Chenopodium rubrum L.-Biol. uns. Zeit. 4: 120–125, 1985.Google Scholar
  25. Zivanović, B., Ćulafić, L.: Photoperiodic induction of flowering in green and photobleached Chenopodium rubrum L. ecotype 184-a short-day plant.-Biol. Plant. 34: 457–460, 1992.Google Scholar
  26. Zivanović, B., Ćulafić, L., Filipović, A.: The effects of hormones and saccharides on growth and flowering of green and herbicides-treated Chenopodium rubrum L. plants.-Biol. Plant. 37: 257–264, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Mitrović
    • 1
  • B. Živanović
    • 1
  • Lj. Ćulafić
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Multidisciplinary StudiesUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeYugoslavia
  2. 2.Institute of Botany, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeYugoslavia

Personalised recommendations