Am. J. Bot. Join the BSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cline, M. G.
Right arrow Articles by Sadeski, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cline, M. G.
Right arrow Articles by Sadeski, K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Cline, M. G.
Right arrow Articles by Sadeski, K.
(American Journal of Botany. 2002;89:1764-1771.)
© 2002 Botanical Society of America, Inc.

Physiology and Development

Is auxin the repressor signal of branch growth in apical control?1

Morris G. Cline2 and Kevin Sadeski

Ohio State University, Department of Plant Biology, Columbus, Ohio 43210 USA

"Apical control" is the repression of branch growth by a higher dominating branch or shoot. There has been some confusion in the literature concerning the meaning and causal mechanisms of this correlative phenomenon with those of "apical dominance," which term is often used in a strict sense to connote the repression of the initiation of axillary bud outgrowth by an active shoot apex. Although the term "apical control" is most commonly employed with respect to woody species, this phenomenon also widely occurs in herbaceous plants. Because of the strong evidence for a role of auxin as a repressor signal in apical dominance and partly because of this lack of distinction in terminology, a similar role for auxin in apical control is often assumed in spite of the obvious acropetal auxin transport difficulty and the lack of direct evidence for the acropetal transport of any inhibitor influence. In the present study with the herbaceous Ipomoea nil, it has been clearly demonstrated that while exogenous auxin (1% NAA) strongly restores apical dominance in the Thimann-Skoog experiment, auxin treatments to decapitated dominant shoots do not, in any observable way, restore apical control in lower dominated branches. Hence, in this fast-growing species, the hypothesis for the role of auxin as a repressor signal for apical control is not supported.

Key Words: acropetal auxin transport • apical control • apical dominance • auxin • branch growth • Convolvulaceae • decapitation • Ipomoea nil • lateral bud






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the Botanical Society of America, Inc.