Companion Cells and Transfer Cells

  • H.-Dietmar Behnke
Part of the NATO Advanced Study Institutes Series book series (NSSA, volume 4)


Phloem tissue as a whole, according to the introduction of this term by Nageli (1858), consists of sieve elements, sclerenchymatic elements and parenchymatic elements. Companion cells and transfer cells, the two cell types to be considered more in detail in the following, belong to the latter group. Parenchymatic elements of phloem as a general term, however, comprise a wide variety of nucleate cells which are referred to as related or unrelated to the enucleate sieve elements. By definition of the phloem those are characteristic constituents in seed plants and ferns, but they are also present in the leptom of bryophytes.


Transfer Cell Companion Cell Sieve Tube Sieve Element Minor Vein 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. BEHNKE, H-D. 1972. Bot. Rev. 38: 155–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BEHNKE, H-D. 1973. Planta 110: 321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BEHNKE, H-D. 1974. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. (in press)Google Scholar
  4. CRONQUIST, A. 1968. The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants - Nelson, London.Google Scholar
  5. DIAMOND, J.M. and BOSSERT, W.H. 1967. J. Gen. Physiol. 50: 2061–2083PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DORR, I. 1972. Protoplasma 75: 167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ESAU, K. 1965. Pr-oc, Am. Phil. Soc. 111: 219–233Google Scholar
  8. ESAU, K. 1969. Encyclop. Plant Anatomy Vol. V,2. Borntrager, Berlin, and Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  9. ESAU, K. 1971 J. Ind. Bot. Soc. 50 A: 115–129Google Scholar
  10. ESAU, K. 1973. Ann. Bot. 37: 625–632Google Scholar
  11. ESAU, K. and CRONSHAW, J. 1968. Can. J. Bot. 46: 877–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ESCHRICH, W. 1963. Planta 59: 243–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. FALK, H. 1964. Planta 60: 558–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. FISCHER, A. 1884. Untersuchungen uber das Siebrohren-System der Cucurbitaceen. Berlin, BorntragerGoogle Scholar
  15. GUNNING, B.E.S. and PATE, J.S. 1969. Protoplasma 68: 107–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. GUNNING, B.E.S. and PATE, J.S. 1974. In: Dynamic Aspects of Plant Ultrastructure, A.W. Robards (eds.). McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead (U.K.). pp. 441–480Google Scholar
  17. GUNNING, B.E.S., J.S. PATE and L.G. BRIARTY. 1968. J. Cell BioI. 37: C7-C12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. GUNNING, B.E.S., J.S. PATE and L.W. GREEN. 1970. Protoplasma 71: 147–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. GUNNING, B.E.S, J.S. PATE, F.R. MICHIN and J. MARKS. 1974. Symposium 28 on Soc. Exp. BioI. (in press).Google Scholar
  20. HILL, A.W. 1908. Ann. Bot. 22: 245–290Google Scholar
  21. JONES, M.G.K. and D.H. NORTHCOTE. 1972. Protoplasma 75: 381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. KOLLMAN, R. 1966. Zur funktionellen Morphologie des Coniferen-Phloems. Habilitationsschrift Bonn.Google Scholar
  23. KOLLMANN, R. 1973. In: Grundlagen der Cytologie, G.C. Hirsch, H. Ruska and R. Sitte, (eds.). Fischer, Stuttgart. pp. 479–504Google Scholar
  24. KRULL, R. 1960. Planta 55: 598–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MAIER, K. and U. MAIER. 1972. Protoplasma 75: 91–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MORRETES, B.L. DE. 1962. Amer. J. Bot. 49: 560–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. NAGELI, C.W. 1858. Beltr, Wiss. Bot. 1: 1–156Google Scholar
  28. OSCHMAN, J.L. and M.J. BERRIDGE. 1971. Fed. Broc. 30: 49–56Google Scholar
  29. PALIWAL, G.S. and H.-D. BEHNKE. 1973. Phytomorphology 23: 183–193Google Scholar
  30. PATE, J.S. and B.E.S. GUNNING. 1969. Protoplasma 68: 135–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. PATE, J.S. and B.E.S. GUNNING. 1972. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 23: 173–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. PATE, J.S., B.S.E. GUNNING and F.F. MILLIKEN. 1970. Protoplasma 71: 313–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. RESCH, A. 1961. Z. Bot. 49: 82–95Google Scholar
  34. ROBARDS, A.W. 1971. Protoplasma 72: 315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. SAUTER, J.J. and H.J. BRAUN. 1968. Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 59: 420–438Google Scholar
  36. SCHNEPF, E. 1974. Port. Acta BioI. sere A (in press)Google Scholar
  37. SRIVASTAVA, L.M. 1970. Can. J. Bot. 48: 341–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. WOODING, F.B.P. and D.H. NORTHCOTE. 1965. Amer J. Bot. 52: 526–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. ZAHUR, M.S. 1959. Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta. Mem. 358Google Scholar
  40. ZEE, S-Y. and T.P. O’BRIEN. 1971. Aust. J. BioI. Sci. 24: 35–49Google Scholar


  1. DORR, I. 1972. Protoplasma 75: 167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. FAHN, A. and RACHMILEVITZ, T. 1970. New Research in Plant Anatomy, Supple J. Linn. Soc pp 51–56 NKB Robson, D.F. Cutler and M. Gregory, eds. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  3. GUNNING, B.E.S., PATE, J.S. and BRIARTY, L.G 1968. J. Cell. BioI. 37: C7 - C12Google Scholar
  4. PATE, J.S. and GUNNING, B.E.S. 1969. Protoplasma 68: 135–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. SCHNEPF, E. 1965. Ber. dtsch. bot. Ges. 78: 478–483Google Scholar
  6. SCHWAB, D.W., SIMMONS, E. and SCALA, J. 1969. Amer. J. 56: 88–100Google Scholar
  7. YEUNG, E.C. and PETERSON, R.L. 1974. Protoplasma 80: 155–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • H.-Dietmar Behnke
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl fur ZellenlehreUniversität HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations