Evolution and Development of Inflorescence Architectures

Prusinkiewicz, Przemysław; Erasmus, Yvette; Lane, Brendan; Harder, Lawrence D.; Coen, Enrico

doi:10.1126/science.1140429

Cited by 336 publications

(315 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

298

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the fact that the flowers in veg1 det are directly formed from the I 1 , as in simple inflorescences, suggests that the default state of the meristems in the pea inflorescence is floral identity, which is normally restricted to the lateral meristems of the I 2 by the concerted action of DET and VEG1. In this sense, VEG1 would be required to maintain 'vegetativeness' , as defined by Prusinkiewicz et al 36 , in the lateral meristems of the I 1 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

VEGETATIVE1 is essential for development of the compound inflorescence in pea

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

unravelling the basis of variation in inflorescence architecture is important to understanding how the huge diversity in plant form has been generated. Inflorescences are divided between simple, as in Arabidopsis, with flowers directly formed at the main primary inflorescence axis, and compound, as in legumes, where they are formed at secondary or even higher order axes. The formation of secondary inflorescences predicts a novel genetic function in the development of the compound inflorescences. Here we show that in pea this function is controlled by VEGETATIVE1 (VEG1), whose mutation replaces secondary inflorescences by vegetative branches. We identify VEG1 as an AGL79-like mADs-box gene that specifies secondary inflorescence meristem identity. VEG1 misexpression in meristem identity mutants causes ectopic secondary inflorescence formation, suggesting a model for compound inflorescence development based on antagonistic interactions between VEG1 and genes conferring primary inflorescence and floral identity. our study defines a novel mechanism to generate inflorescence complexity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

VEGETATIVE1 is essential for development of the compound inflorescence in pea

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The modular logic of the mouse lung branching program suggests how such structural diversity is created during evolution [40][41][42] . New branching patterns can arise by reiterative use of subroutines or new patterns of their deployment.…”

Section: Evolution Of Branching Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the human bronchial tree contains millions of branches, several orders of magnitude more than in mouse, whereas the lobes of frog lung are unbranched sacs. Human and mouse lungs also differ in lobation and branch pattern.The modular logic of the mouse lung branching program suggests how such structural diversity is created during evolution [40][41][42] . New branching patterns can arise by reiterative use of subroutines or new patterns of their deployment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The branching programme of mouse lung development

Metzger

Klein

Martin

et al. 2008

Nature

687

768

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mammalian lungs are branched networks containing thousands to millions of airways arrayed in intricate patterns that are crucial for respiration. How such trees are generated during development, and how the developmental patterning information is encoded, have long fascinated biologists and mathematicians. However, models have been limited by a lack of information on the normal sequence and pattern of branching events. Here we present the complete three-dimensional branching pattern and lineage of the mouse bronchial tree, reconstructed from an analysis of hundreds of developmental intermediates. The branching process is remarkably stereotyped and elegant: the tree is generated by three geometrically simple local modes of branching used in three different orders throughout the lung. We propose that each mode of branching is controlled by a genetically-encoded subroutine, a series of local patterning and morphogenesis operations, which are themselves controlled by a more global master routine. We show that this hierarchical and modular program is genetically tractable, and it is ideally suited to encoding and evolving the complex networks of the lung and other branched organs.Many organs are composed of highly ramified tubular networks, each with a distinct architecture tailored to its physiological function. The bronchial tree of the human lung has over 10 5 conducting and 10 7 respiratory airways arrayed in an intricate pattern crucial for oxygen flow [1][2][3][4] . Classical studies of lung structure 5-8 raise the question of how the information required to generate a tree of such complexity is biologically encoded 9 . Individually configuring thousands or millions of branches would require a tremendous amount of patterning information, far more than is biologically plausible, to specify when and where each branch forms during development, and the size, shape, and direction of outgrowth of each branch. One possibility is that the process is not precisely controlled, for example if branching occurs randomly to fill available space. Another is that control is precise but coding is simplified by repeated use of a branching mechanism, as in Mandelbrot's fractal model and other elegant algorithms [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Even with these attractive models and recent progress in identifying lung development genes 18 , understanding of the program that directs branching remains rudimentary. This is largely due to the complexity of the bronchial tree, which makes it difficult to follow branching dynamics beyond the earliest events [19][20][21] . Although branching of the lung and other organs can occur in culture [22][23][24][25] , it is unlikely these recapitulate the full pattern. Here, we have determined the complete in vivo pattern of branching and branch lineage of the mouse bronchial tree, and show that it is generated using three geometrically distinct local modes of branching coupled in three different sequences. The branch lineage of the mouse bronchial treeThe bronchial tree develops by bran...

show abstract

“…He concluded that, contrary to previous opinion, we should not be so impressed by the diversity of forms of biological organisms, but instead should ask why haven't more forms existed? This enigma has persisted to today; e.g., the cover story of a recent issue of Science explored: "why the biological forms [of plants] we see in nature represent such a small part of theoretical possibilities" (Prusinkiewicz et al, 2007). Niklas (1999) asserts that the fundamental debate about plant models is whether selection ("persistent and strong environmental sorting") is the major evolutionary force in accounting for the recognizable morphology of species or whether differences between species are "largely undetected by natural selection."…”

Section: Evolutionary Morphospacementioning

confidence: 99%

Morphospace: Measurement, Modeling, Mathematics, and Meaning

Khiripet

Viruchpintu

Maneewattanapluk

et al. 2010

Math. Model. Nat. Phenom.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Artists have long recognized that trees are self-similar across enormous differences in magnitudes; i.e., they share a common fractal structure -a trunk subdivides into branches which subdivide into more branches which eventually terminate in leaves, flowers, fruits, etc. Artistid Lindenmayer (1971, 1975, 1989, 1990) invented a mathematics based on graph grammar rewriting systems to describe such iteratively branching structures; these were named in honor of him and are referred to as L-systems. With the advent of fractals into computer graphics, numerous artists have similarly produced a wide variety of software packages to illustrate the beauty of fractal/Lsystem generated plants. Some tree visualizations such as L-Peach (Allen et al., 2005) do depend very explicitly upon a complex set of precise measurements of a single species of tree. Nonetheless, we felt that there is a need to build a package that allowed scientists (and students) to collect data from actual specimens in the field or laboratory, insert these measurements into an L-system package, and then visually compare actual trees to the computer generated image with such specimens. Furthermore, the effect of variance in parameters helps users evaluate the developmental plasticity both within and between species and varieties. We have developed 3D FractaL Tree (the L is capitalized in honor of Lindemayer) to generate trees based upon measurement of (1) relative lengths of two successive segments averaged over several iterations, (2) the angle theta between bifurcating limbs at successive joints, (3) the number of steps in branching that one must follow to find a branch extending at the same angle as the first one under consideration to determine the phyllotactic angle phi, (4) the average of the summed areas (determined from measurement of diameters) of bifurcations compared to the trunk to determine whether area of flow is preserved (and * Corresponding author. E-mail: jungck@beloit. Morphospace: measurement, modeling, mathematics, and meaning to consider Poiseuille's/Murray's law of laminar flow in a fractal network), (5) the total number of iterative branching from the base to the tip of tree averaged over several counts based on following out different major limbs, (6) an editable L-system rule chosen from a library of branching patterns that roughly correspond to a specimen under consideration, and (7) a degree of stochasticity applied to the above rules to represent some variation over the course of a lifetime. Of course, turned upside down, the computer imagery could be used to represent root structure instead of above ground growth or the bronchial system of a lung, for example. The measurements are recorded and analyzed in a series of worksheets in Microsoft Excel and the results are entered into the graphics engine in a Java application. 3D FractaL Tree produces a rotatable three-dimensional image of the tree which is helpful for examining such characters as self-avoidance (entanglement and breakage), reception of and penetration o...

show abstract

Evolution and Development of Inflorescence Architectures

Cited by 336 publications

References 27 publications

VEGETATIVE1 is essential for development of the compound inflorescence in pea

VEGETATIVE1 is essential for development of the compound inflorescence in pea

The branching programme of mouse lung development

Morphospace: Measurement, Modeling, Mathematics, and Meaning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About