Ethylene and Silver Thiosulfate Influence Opening of Cut Rose Flowers

Abstract

The presence of very low concentrations of ethylene had dramatic effects on the opening of cut flowers of rose (Rosa hybrida L.). Depending on cultivar, the rate of opening was unaffected (e.g., ‘Gold Rush’), accelerated (e.g., ‘Sterling Silver’), or inhibited (e.g., ‘Lovely Girl’). The Km for the inhibition of opening of ‘Lovely Girl’ by ethylene was 4 ppb. Flowers of some cultivars (e.g., ‘Royalty’) had an abnormal shape when opened in the presence of ethylene. The effects of exogenous ethylene could be overcome by pretreatment of the flowers with 0.5 μmol silver thiosulfate per stem. No phytotoxicity was observed in flowers treated with 2 μmol per stem. Examination of the kinetics of the ethylene/Ag+ interaction in inhibition of opening of ‘Lovely Girl’ flowers indicated that the Ag+/ethylene interaction was competitive.

Effects of postharvest pretreatments and preservative solutions on vase life longevity and flower quality of sweet pea (Lathyrus odoratus L.)

“…As well as 8-HQS, silver thiosulfate (STS) treatments could improve the keeping quality and vase life of sweet pea cut flowers. STS acts as an ethylene antagonist, reducing ethylene production and respiration (Veen 1979) and extending floral longevity (Reid et al 1980). Sexton et al (1995) reported that a pulse treatment of sucrose and/or STS effectively prolonged the vase life of cut sweet pea flowers.…”

β-Cyclodextrin-based nanosponges improve 1-MCP efficacy in extending the postharvest quality of cut flowers

“…In rose, flower opening seemed to be affected by exogenous ethylene (Reid et al, 1989). Ethylene induced abscission of fully turgescent, non-senescent petals or the entire corolla (Serek et al, 2006), which suggests that anti-ethylene compounds could retard the behavior (Serek et al, 1995b) and extend vase life (Mor et al, 1989).…”

Why flowers close at noon? A case study of an alpine species Gentianopsis paludosa (Gentianaceae)

“…Furthermore, maintenance of flower opening and petal movement are resource cost, because petal movement always involves physiological changes, such as changes in epidermal cells (Wood, 1953), cell wall extensions (Brummel et al, 1999), carbohydrate metabolism (Bieleski et al, 2000), and hormone regulation (Reid et al, 1989).…”

“…However, we failed to experimentally test the protective effect of this petal movement on the reproductive organs, and a further study is needed in the future. Furthermore, maintenance of flower opening and petal movement are resource cost, because petal movement always involves physiological changes, such as changes in epidermal cells (Wood, 1953), cell wall extensions (Brummel et al, 1999), carbohydrate metabolism (Bieleski et al, 2000), and hormone regulation (Reid et al, 1989). Thus, floral closure in the daytime might save resource that would allocate to maintenance of floral opening, which might enhance reproductive success of plant species capable of autonomous selfing.…”