4.3 Article

Seed dormancy is a dynamic state: variable responses to pre- and post-shedding environmental signals in seeds of contrasting Arabidopsis ecotypes

期刊

SEED SCIENCE RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 2, 页码 159-169

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S096025851500001X

关键词

afterripening; Arabidopsis; nitrate; seed dormancy; seed germination; soil seed bank; temperature

资金

  1. Warwick University Postgraduate Research Scholarship
  2. UK BBSRC [BB/I022201/1]
  3. BBSRC [BB/I022201/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/I022201/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seeds have evolved to be highly efficient environmental sensors that respond not only to their prevailing environment, but also their environmental history, to regulate dormancy and the initiation of germination. In the present work we investigate the combined impact of a number of environmental signals (temperature, nitrate, light) during seed development on the mother plant, during post-shedding imbibition and during prolonged post-shedding exposure in both dry and imbibed states, simulating time in the soil seed bank. The differing response to these environments was observed in contrasting winter (Cvi, Ler) and summer (Bur) annual Arabidopsis ecotypes. Results presented show that environmental signals both pre- and post-shedding determine the depth of physiological dormancy and therefore the germination response to the ambient environment. The ecotype differences in seed response to ambient germination conditions are greatly enhanced by seed maturation in different environments. Further variation in response develops following shedding when seeds do not receive the full complement of environmental signals required for germination and enter the soil seed bank in either dry or imbibed states. Species seed dormancy characteristics cannot therefore be easily defined, as seed dormancy is a dynamic state subject to within-species adaptation to local environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据