Abstract
Plant development is highly affected by light quality, direction, and intensity. Under natural growth conditions, shoots are directly exposed to light whereas roots develop underground shielded from direct illumination. The photomorphogenic development strongly represses shoot elongation whereas promotes root growth. Over the years, several studies helped the elucidation of signaling elements that coordinate light perception and underlying developmental outputs. Light exposure of the shoots has diverse effects on main root growth and lateral root (LR) formation. In this study, we evaluated the phenotypic root responses of wild-type Arabidopsis plants, as well as several mutants, grown in a D-Root system. We observed that sucrose and light act synergistically to promote root growth and that sucrose alone cannot overcome the light requirement for root growth. We also have shown that roots respond to the light intensity applied to the shoot by changes in primary and LR development. Loss-of-function mutants for several root light-response genes display varying phenotypes according to the light intensity to which shoots are exposed. Low light intensity strongly impaired LR development for most genotypes. Only vid-27 and pils4 mutants showed higher LR density at 40 μmol m –2 s –1 than at 80 μmol m –2 s –1 whereas yuc3 and shy2-2 presented no LR development in any light condition, reinforcing the importance of auxin signaling in light-dependent root development. Our results support the use of D-Root systems to avoid the effects of direct root illumination that might lead to artifacts and unnatural phenotypic outputs.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Sucrose and light synergistically promoted root growth.
Verbatim
e0“sucrose and light act synergistically to promote root growth”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Sucrose alone could not overcome the light requirement for root growth.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sucrose alone cannot overcome the light requirement for root growth”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Root primary development changed with light intensity applied to shoots.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“roots respond to the light intensity applied to the shoot by changes in primary and LR development”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Lateral root development changed with light intensity applied to shoots.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“roots respond to the light intensity applied to the shoot by changes in primary and LR development”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Root light response mutants showed phenotypes varying with shoot light intensity.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Loss-of-function mutants for several root light-response genes display varying phenotypes according to the light intensity to which shoots are exposed”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Low light strongly impaired lateral root development in most genotypes.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low light intensity strongly impaired LR development for most genotypes”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
vid-27 mutants had higher lateral root density at 40 than at 80 μmol m –2 s –1.
Verbatim
e0“vid-27 and pils4 mutants showed higher LR density at 40 μmol m –2 s –1 than at 80 μmol m –2 s –1”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
pils4 mutants had higher lateral root density at 40 than at 80 μmol m –2 s –1.
Verbatim
e0“vid-27 and pils4 mutants showed higher LR density at 40 μmol m –2 s –1 than at 80 μmol m –2 s –1”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
yuc3 mutants had no lateral root development in any light condition.
Verbatim
e0“yuc3 and shy2-2 presented no LR development in any light condition”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
shy2-2 mutants had no lateral root development in any light condition.
Verbatim
e0“yuc3 and shy2-2 presented no LR development in any light condition”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend D-Root systems to avoid direct root illumination artifacts.
Verbatim
e0“Our results support the use of D-Root systems to avoid the effects of direct root illumination that might lead to artifacts and unnatural phenotypic outputs”
e1“wild-type Arabidopsis plants”
The same questions in other papers
sucrose · growth · ArabidopsisPositive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →light · growth · ArabidopsisResults differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.