Floral Initiation and Inflorescence Architecture: A Comparative View

Benlloch, Reyes; Berbel, Ana; Serrano-Mislata, Antonio; Madueño, Francisco

doi:10.1093/aob/mcm146

Cited by 192 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of environmental factors on flowering involves several signaling pathways that converge towards the regulation of floral meristem identity (Mouradov et al 2002). 'Integrators' genes, such as FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) and SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO1 (SOC1) co-operate in the upregulation of floral meristem identity genes like LEAFY (LFY) and APETALA1 (AP1) (Benlloch et al 2007;Cockram et al 2007;Krizek and Fletcher 2005). These genes up-regulate each other and are essentially expressed in the shoot apical meristem (SAM), where the transition from vegetative to reproductive development is followed by the differentiation of inflorescence and individual flowers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, the floral organ identity genes regulate the various cell types and tissues' specialization, including sepals, petals, stamens and carpels (Benlloch et al 2007;Bernier and Perilleux 2005;Moon et al 2005). Regulatory genes, involved in this process, act either as activators or as repressors of floral initiation, and the concerted action of the regulatory network ensures the correct temporal and spatial control of floral meristem specification, its maintenance and development (Vijayraghavan et al 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was proposed that LFY combines properties of flowering-time and flowermeristem-identity genes, and provides a direct link between the global process of floral induction (Benlloch et al 2007;Blázquez and Weigel 2000;Nilsson et al 1998), the regional events associated with the initiation of individual flowers (Vijayraghavan et al 2005), and activation of the ABC genes such as AGAMOUS (AG), APETALA1 (AP1) and APETALA3 (AP3) that control floral organ identity (Lamb et al 2002;Zik and Irish 2003;Benlloch et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Flower development in garlic: the ups and downs of gaLFY expression

Rotem

David‐Schwartz

Peretz

et al. 2011

Planta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of sexual processes prohibits genetic studies and conventional breeding in commercial cultivars of garlic. Recent restoration of garlic flowering ability by environmental manipulations has opened new avenues for physiological and genetic studies. The LEAFY homologue gaLFY has been shown to be involved in the floral development, while two alternatively spliced gaLFY transcripts are expressed in flowering genotypes. In the present work, quantitative real-time PCR and two techniques of RNA in situ hybridization were employed to analyze spatiotemporal expression patterns of the gaLFY during consequent stages of the garlic reproductive process. Temporal accumulation of gaLFY is strongly associated with reproductive organs, significantly increased during florogenesis and gametogenesis, and is down-regulated in the vegetative meristems and topsets in the inflorescence. The two alternative transcripts of the gene show different expression patterns: a high level of the long gaLFY transcript coincided only with floral transition, while further up-regulation of this gene in the reproductive organs is associated mainly with the short gaLFY transcript. It is concluded that gaLFY is involved at different stages of the sexual reproduction of garlic. These new insights broaden our basic understanding of flower biology of garlic and help to establish conventional and molecular breeding systems for this important crop.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flower development in garlic: the ups and downs of gaLFY expression

Rotem

David‐Schwartz

Peretz

et al. 2011

Planta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Arabidopsis, the master genes Leafy (LFY), Apetala1 (AP1), Flowering locus T (FT) and Terminal flower 1 (TFL1) serve as the backbone of the regulatory network that controls floral meristem formation and inflorescence development (Blázquez et al 2006;Benlloch et al 2007). Consequently, elucidating possible associations of their grapevine homologs to bud fruitfulness could shed light on the regulation of grapevine inflorescence development.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytokinin-induced VvTFL1A expression may be involved in the control of grapevine fruitfulness

Crane

Halaly

Pang

et al. 2011

Planta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grapevine bud fruitfulness is determined by the differentiation of uncommitted meristem (UCM) into either tendril or inflorescence. Since tendril and inflorescence differentiation have long been considered sequential steps in inflorescence development, factors that control the progression of floral meristem development may regulate the final outcome of UCM differentiation, and thus affect fruitfulness. A comparison of the expression profiles of the master regulators of floral meristem identity (FMI) during development of fruitful and non-fruitful buds along the same cane allowed associating the expression of a homolog of terminal flower 1 (TFL1, a negative regulator of FMI) to fruitful buds, and the expression of positive FMI regulators to non-fruitful buds. Combined with (a) cytokinin-induced upregulation of VvTFL1A expression in cultured tendrils, which accompanied cytokinin-derived tendril transformation into branched, inflorescence-like structures, (b) positive regulation of VvTFL1A expression by cytokinin, which was demonstrated in transgenic embryonic culture expressing GUS reporter under the control of VvTFL1A promoter, and (c) a significantly higher level of active cytokinins in fruitful positions, the data may support the assumption of cytokinin-regulated VvTFL1A activity's involvement in the control of inflorescence development. Such activity may delay acquisition of FMI and allow an extended branching period for the UCM, resulting in the differentiation of inflorescence primordia.

show abstract

“…Compared with the flower, the inflorescence has been relatively neglected and hence models of inflorescence development remain relatively crude, partly because the existing inflorescence terminology is highly problematic (cf. Benlloch et al 2007;Prusinkiewicz et al 2007;Prenner et al 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining the limits of flowers: the challenge of distinguishing between the evolutionary products of simple versus compound strobili

Rudall

Bateman

2010

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent phylogenetic reconstructions suggest that axially condensed flower-like structures evolved iteratively in seed plants from either simple or compound strobili. The simple-strobilus model of flower evolution, widely applied to the angiosperm flower, interprets the inflorescence as a compound strobilus. The conifer cone and the gnetalean 'flower' are commonly interpreted as having evolved from a compound strobilus by extreme condensation and (at least in the case of male conifer cones) elimination of some structures present in the presumed ancestral compound strobilus. These two hypotheses have profoundly different implications for reconstructing the evolution of developmental genetic mechanisms in seed plants. If different flower-like structures evolved independently, there should intuitively be little commonality of patterning genes. However, reproductive units of some early-divergent angiosperms, including the extant genus Trithuria (Hydatellaceae) and the extinct genus Archaefructus (Archaefructaceae), apparently combine features considered typical of flowers and inflorescences. We re-evaluate several disparate strands of comparative data to explore whether flower-like structures could have arisen by co-option of flower-expressed patterning genes into independently evolved condensed inflorescences, or vice versa. We discuss the evolution of the inflorescence in both gymnosperms and angiosperms, emphasising the roles of heterotopy in dictating gender expression and heterochrony in permitting internodal compression.

show abstract

Floral Initiation and Inflorescence Architecture: A Comparative View

Abstract: In this review we aim to present a summarized view on what is known about floral initiation genes in different plants, particularly dicotyledonous species, and aim to emphasize their contribution to plant architecture.

Cited by 192 publications

References 106 publications

Flower development in garlic: the ups and downs of gaLFY expression

Flower development in garlic: the ups and downs of gaLFY expression

Cytokinin-induced VvTFL1A expression may be involved in the control of grapevine fruitfulness

Defining the limits of flowers: the challenge of distinguishing between the evolutionary products of simple versus compound strobili

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About