Abstract
The effect of illumination on the incorporation of labeled precursors into RNA of dark-grown maize (Zea mays) leaves was studied using either (32)P-phosphate or double labeling with (14)C- and (3)H-uridine. In the dark, label was preferentially incorporated into etioplast ribosomal RNAs. Incorporation into this fraction and into lower molecular weight fractions was strongly and preferentially stimulated by light during the first 2 hours of illumination. The effect persisted after illumination was terminated. The possibility that light-induced alterations in plastid ribosomal RNA metabolism may not be required for chlorophyll accumulation in maize is discussed.Sucrose density gradient analyses of ribosomes and of extracted RNA did not reveal light-induced incorporation of label into messenger-like RNA associated with polyribosomes during brief illumination. However, newly produced RNA which seems to be neither ribosomal RNA nor transfer RNA is detectable after illumination for 2.5 hours or longer.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
In darkness, label was preferentially incorporated into etioplast ribosomal RNA in maize leaves.
- Organ / stage
- Leavest0
- Outcome
- label was preferentially incorporated into etioplast ribosomal RNAse0
- Setting
- In the darke0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the dark, label was preferentially incorporated into etioplast ribosomal RNAs”
t0“Maize Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Light strongly stimulated label incorporation into etioplast ribosomal RNA and lower molecular weight fractions in the first two hours.
- Treatment
- lighte0
- Outcome
- Incorporation into this fraction and into lower molecular weight fractionse0
- Direction
- stimulatede0
- Qualifier
- during the first 2 hours of illuminatione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Incorporation into this fraction and into lower molecular weight fractions was strongly and preferentially stimulated by light during the first 2 hours of illumination”
t0“Maize Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
The light stimulation of RNA labeling persisted after illumination ended.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The effect persisted after illumination was terminated”
t0“Maize Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Brief illumination did not reveal light induced label incorporation into polyribosome associated messenger-like RNA.
- Treatment
- brief illuminatione0
- Outcome
- light-induced incorporation of label into messenger-like RNA associated with polyribosomese0
- Direction
- did not reveale0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“did not reveal light-induced incorporation of label into messenger-like RNA associated with polyribosomes during brief illumination”
t0“Maize Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Newly produced RNA distinct from ribosomal and transfer RNA became detectable after at least 2.5 hours of illumination.
- Outcome
- newly produced RNA which seems to be neither ribosomal RNA nor transfer RNA is detectablee0
- Qualifier
- after illumination for 2.5 hours or longere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“newly produced RNA which seems to be neither ribosomal RNA nor transfer RNA is detectable after illumination for 2.5 hours or longer”
t0“Maize Leaves”
The same questions in other papers
light · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.