2019
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erz271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Laser ablation tomography for visualization of root colonization by edaphic organisms

Abstract: Soil biota have important effects on crop productivity, but can be difficult to study in situ. Laser ablation tomography (LAT) is a novel method that allows for rapid, three-dimensional quantitative and qualitative analysis of root anatomy, providing new opportunities to investigate interactions between roots and edaphic organisms. LAT was used for analysis of maize roots colonized by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, maize roots herbivorized by western corn rootworm, barley roots parasitized by cereal cyst nemato… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
66
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 80 publications
(87 reference statements)
0
66
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It has been proposed that the differing demands placed on root system architecture and anatomy by direct foraging and AM symbiosis prevent co-optimization for both (Lambers et al, 2008;Wen et al, 2019). For example, although increasing the proportion of root cortical aerenchyma (root air space) reduces the "carbon cost" of the root system, promoting foraging efficiency (Postma & Lynch, 2011), the reduction in cortical tissue may limit AMF colonization and, potentially, host response (Strock et al, 2019). It was somewhat surprising to see a QTL for a morphological trait such as tassel branch number to be conditional on AM susceptibility; such observations may indicate the action of pleiotropic systemic signals on host plant development.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been proposed that the differing demands placed on root system architecture and anatomy by direct foraging and AM symbiosis prevent co-optimization for both (Lambers et al, 2008;Wen et al, 2019). For example, although increasing the proportion of root cortical aerenchyma (root air space) reduces the "carbon cost" of the root system, promoting foraging efficiency (Postma & Lynch, 2011), the reduction in cortical tissue may limit AMF colonization and, potentially, host response (Strock et al, 2019). It was somewhat surprising to see a QTL for a morphological trait such as tassel branch number to be conditional on AM susceptibility; such observations may indicate the action of pleiotropic systemic signals on host plant development.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Laser ablation tomography has been applied to segments of barley roots infected by the cereal cyst nematode (CCN; Heterodera avenae W.) 28 . This approach revealed the shapes and relative positions of nematodes, feeding sites and surrounding tissue, but with less detail than can be seen with microscopy.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The former produces reasonably good results at a fairly high resolution (3 μm) following the infiltration of an appropriate “contrast agent” such as phosphotungstate and critical‐point drying (Staedler et al., ). The latter, LAT, has the advantage of high throughput, but is limited in resolution to >0.1 mm (Strock et al., ), so it is even less useful for studying fine anatomical details than MRI and has the disadvantage of destroying and discarding the sample as it proceeds. Wu et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neither MRI nor CLSM is suitable for observing fine cell structure, which currently requires a fixation technique that maintains cell ultrastructural features, appropriate staining, and the thin to ultrathin sectioning of tissue required for a good resolution of detail and contrast (Niki et al., ). Other methods relying on advanced technology have been successfully used for the 3D reconstruction of plant structures, such as X‐ray tomography (micro‐CT) (Staedler et al., ) and laser ablation technology (LAT) (Strock et al., ), but the latter obliterates the specimen and neither method provides as high a level of resolution as CLSM or the new method we present here.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%