The genetic control of patterning in pea leaves

Trends in Plant Science

Volumn 3, Issue 11, 1998, Pages 439-444

  Hofer, Julie M I ^a   Ellis, T H Noel ^a  

^a JOHN INNES CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031740881     PISSN: 13601385     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1360-1385(98)01332-6     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Arber, A. (1950) The Natural Philosophy of Plant Form, Cambridge University Press.
2. Lacroix C.R., Sattler R. Expression of shoot features in early leaf development of Murraya paniculata (Rutaceae). Can. J. Bot. 72:1994;678-687.
3. Steeves, T.A. and Sussex, I.M. (1989) Patterns in Plant Development, Cambridge University Press.
4. Marx G.A. A suite of mutants that modify pattern formation in pea leaves. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 5:1987;311-335.
5. Blixt S. Mutation genetics in Pisum. Agric. Hort. Genet. 30:1972;1-293.
6. Steingraeber D.A., Fischer J.B. Indeterminate growth of leaves in Guarea (Meliaceae): a twig analogue. Am. J. Bot. 73:1986;852-862.
7. Meicenheimer R.D.et al. Meristem characteristics of genetically modified pea (Pisum sativum) leaf primordia. Can. J. Bot. 61:1983;3430-3437.
8. Ctti R.et al. Comparative leaf development of conventional and semileafless pea (Pisum sativum). Can. J. Bot. 70:1992;571-580.
9. Rutishauser R., Sattler R. Architecture and development of the phyllode-stipule whorls of Acacia longipedunculata: controversial interpretations and continuum approach. Can. J. Bot. 64:1986;1987-2019.
10. Villani P.J., DeMason D.A. Roles of the Af and Tl genes in pea leaf morphogenesis: characterisation of the double mutant (afaftltl). Am. J. Bot. 84:1997;1323-1336.
11. Sachs T. Regeneration experiments on the determination of the form of leaves. Isr. J. Bot. 18:1969;21-30.
12. Gould K.S., Cutter E.G., Young J.P.W. The determination of pea leaves, leaflets and tendrils. Am. J. Bot. 81:1994;352-360.
13. Dengler N.G. Comparison of leaf development in normal (+μ+), entire (e/e), and lanceolate (La/+) plants of tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum 'Ailsa Craig'. Bot. Gaz. 145:1984;66-77.
14. Chandra Sekhar K.N., Sawhney V.K. Leaf development in the normal and solanifolia mutant of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Am. J. Bot. 77:1990;46-53.
15. Eriksson G. Erbkomplexe des Rotklees und der Erbsen. Z. Pflanzenzücht. 14:1929;445-475.
16. Hofer J.et al. UNIFOLIATA regulates leaf and flower morphogenesis in pea. Curr. Biol. 7:1997;581-587.
17. Scanlon M.J., Schneeberger R.G., Freeling M. The maize mutant narrow sheath fails to establish leaf margin identity in a meristematic domain. Development. 122:1996;1683-1691.
18. Lamm R. Three new genes in Pisum. Hereditas. 43:1957;541-548.
19. de Vilmorin P., Bateson W. A case of gametic coupling in Pisum. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B. 84:1911;9-11.
20. White O. Studies of inheritance in Pisum II. The present state of knowledge of heredity and variation in peas. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 56:1917;487-588.
21. Kujala V. Felderbse bei welcher die ganze Blattspreite in Ranken umgewandelt ist. Arch. Soc. Zool. Bot. Fenn. 8:1953;44-45.
22. Bell, A.D. (1991) in Plant Form. An Illustrated Guide to Flowering Plant Morphology, Oxford University Press.
23. Solov'eva V.K. New varieties of shelling peas. Agrobiologiya. 5:1958;124-126.
24. Goldenberg J.B. afila, a new mutation in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Bol. Genet. 1:1965;27-31.
25. Gorel F.L., Berdnikov V.A., Temnykh S.V. A deletion covering the Tl locus in Pisum sativum. Pisum Genetics. 26:1994;16-17.
26. Coen E.S., Meyerowitz E.M. The war of the whorls: genetic interactions controlling flower development. Nature. 353:1991;31-37.
27. Gould K.S., Young J.P.W., Cutter E.G. L-system analysis of compound leaf development in Pisum sativum L. Ann. Bot. 70:1992;189-196.
28. Lu B.et al. The control of pinna morphology in wild-type and mutant leaves of the garden pea (Pisum sativum L.). Int. J. Plant Sci. 157:1996;659-673.
29. Gould K.S., Cutter E.G., Young J.P.W. Morphogenesis of the compound leaf in three genotypes of the pea, Pisum sativum. Can. J. Bot. 64:1986;1268-1276.
30. Wellensiek S.J. Neutronic mutations in peas. Euphytica. 8:1959;209-215.
31. Wellensiek S.J. The linkage relations of the cochleata mutant in Pisum. Genetica. 33:1962;145-153.
32. Young J.P.W. Pea leaf morphogenesis: A simple model. Ann. Bot. 52:1983;311-316.
33. Lee I.et al. A LEAFY co-regulator encoded by UNUSUAL FLORAL ORGANS. Curr. Biol. 7:1996;95-104.
34. Smith L.G.et al. A dominant mutation in the maize homeobox gene, Knotted-1, causes ectopic expression in leaf cells with altered fates. Development. 116:1992;21-30.
35. Sinha N.R., Williams R.E., Hake S. Overexpression of the maize homeobox gene KNOTTED1, causes a switch from determinate to indeterminate cell fates. Genes Dev. 7:1993;787-795.
36. Lincoln C.et al. A knotted-like homeobox gene in Arabidopsis is expressed in the vegetative meristem and dramatically alters leaf morphology when overexpressed in transgenic plants. Plant Cell. 6:1994;1859-1876.
37. Hareven D.et al. The making of a compound leaf: genetic manipulation of leaf architecture in tomato. Cell. 84:1996;735-744.
38. Waites R.et al. The PHANTASTICA gene encodes a MYB transcription factor involved in growth and dorsoventrality of lateral organs in Antirrhinum. Cell. 93:1998;779-789.