Paper · 1964 · American Journal of Botany

FURTHER STUDIES OF GAMMA‐IRRADIATED WHEAT AND THEIR RELEVANCE TO USE OF MITOTIC INHIBITION FOR DEVELOPMENTAL STUDIES

Alan H. Haber; Donald E. Foard

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
46
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

After gamma irradiation of wheat grain, embryos can germinate and grow without detectable mitotic figures and without increases in tissue‐cell numbers. Roots growing without DNA synthesis after irradiation show the 2 striking examples of normal nuclear behavior on the anatomic level that occur in unirradiated roots: (1) trichoblast nuclei migrate into the root hairs and change shape; and (2) nuclei in sieve‐tube elements and vessel elements disappear. Nuclei that do not synthesize DNA do synthesize RNA, some of which moves into the cytoplasm. Therefore, the irradiation that prevents DNA synthesis and mitosis has not completely inactivated all nuclear functions. On a purely descriptive level, the irradiation that prevents cell division seems to prevent the initiation at the apical “meristem” of immature vascular elements but does not prevent maturation in those vascular elements detectable before irradiation. Although the ultimate extent of growth is reduced in those structures which suffer radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition, it is not reduced in those structures (epiblast, coleorhiza, root hairs) which develop without cell division in unirradiated controls and, therefore, have no mitosis for the radiation to inhibit. This established generalization leads to the inference that the smaller sizes attained by gamma‐plantlet roots and leaves may be attributed largely or almost entirely to the radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition rather than to other actions of radiation. Irrespective of the validity of this last inference, the extent of growth theoretically possible without cell division is at least as great as the observed growth of gamma‐plantlets under given experimental conditions. Also reported are variations in radiation sensitivity among different batches of grain, among different organs within the same embryo, and among different cell types within the same organ. These variations are discussed with reference to suggestions and precautions concerning the use of radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition for developmental studies.

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 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irradiated wheat embryos germinated and grew without detectable mitoses or increased tissue-cell numbers.

Organ / stage
embryose0
Treatment
gamma irradiatione0
Outcome
germinate and grow without detectable mitotic figures and without increases in tissue‐cell numberse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“After gamma irradiation of wheat grain, embryos can germinate and grow without detectable mitotic figures and without increases in tissue‐cell numbers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–151 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trichoblast nuclei migrated into root hairs and changed shape despite absent DNA synthesis after irradiation.

Organ / stage
root hairse0
Outcome
trichoblast nuclei migrate into the root hairs and change shapee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Roots growing without DNA synthesis after irradiation show the 2 striking examples of normal nuclear behavior on the anatomic level that occur in unirradiated roots: (1) trichoblast nuclei migrate into the root hairs and change shape”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–385 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nuclei in sieve-tube and vessel elements disappeared despite absent DNA synthesis after irradiation.

Organ / stage
sieve‐tube elements and vessel elementse0
Outcome
nuclei in sieve‐tube elements and vessel elements disappeare0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“nuclei in sieve‐tube elements and vessel elements disappear”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 395–454 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nuclei lacking DNA synthesis still synthesized RNA, some of which entered the cytoplasm.

Outcome
synthesize RNA, some of which moves into the cytoplasme0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Nuclei that do not synthesize DNA do synthesize RNA, some of which moves into the cytoplasm.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 456–548 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irradiation preventing cell division appeared to prevent initiation of immature vascular elements at the apical meristem.

Treatment
irradiatione0
Outcome
initiation at the apical “meristem” of immature vascular elementse0
Direction
prevente0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irradiation that prevents cell division seems to prevent the initiation at the apical “meristem” of immature vascular elements”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 705–831 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irradiation did not prevent maturation of vascular elements detectable before treatment.

Treatment
irradiatione0
Outcome
maturation in those vascular elementse0
Direction
does not prevente0
Qualifier
detectable before irradiatione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“does not prevent maturation in those vascular elements detectable before irradiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–920 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Growth extent fell in structures with radiation-induced mitotic inhibition.

Treatment
radiation‐induced mitotic inhibitione0
Outcome
ultimate extent of growthe0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ultimate extent of growth is reduced in those structures which suffer radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1041 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Growth extent did not fall in epiblast, coleorhiza, and root hairs that develop without cell division in controls.

Organ / stage
epiblast, coleorhiza, root hairse0
Outcome
extent of growthe1
Direction
not reducede0
Comparator
unirradiated controlse0

Not reportedTreatment

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it is not reduced in those structures (epiblast, coleorhiza, root hairs) which develop without cell division in unirradiated controls”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1043–1176 · show in text ↑
e1

“the ultimate extent of growth is reduced in those structures which suffer radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1041 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The smaller roots and leaves of gamma plantlets were inferred to be largely due to mitotic inhibition.

Outcome
smaller sizes attained by gamma‐plantlet roots and leavese0
Qualifier
radiation‐induced mitotic inhibitione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“smaller sizes attained by gamma‐plantlet roots and leaves may be attributed largely or almost entirely to the radiation‐induced mitotic inhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1303–1449 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Radiation sensitivity varied across grain batches, organs, and cell types.

Outcome
variations in radiation sensitivitye0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“variations in radiation sensitivity among different batches of grain, among different organs within the same embryo, and among different cell types within the same organ”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1730–1899 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–41 · show in text ↑

radiation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

89 papers: 35 positive, 54 negative or no effect

53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

85 papers more in this group

See all 89 papers →

radiation · phenology · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 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.