Early scion/stock junction in compatible and incompatible pear/pear and pear/quince grafts: A histo-cytological study

Annals of Botany

Volumn 79, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 505-515

  Ermel, F F ^a   Poessel J L ^a   Faurobert, M ^a   Catesson, A M ^b,c  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

^b ECOLE NORMALE SUPÉRIEURE   (France)

^c SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Callus; cambium; Cydonia oblonga; differentiation; graft; histology; incompatibility; pear; Pyrus communis; quince

Indexed keywords

CYDONIA OBLONGA; PYRUS COMMUNIS;

EID: 0343632365     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbo/79.5.505     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Alder E, Björkqvist KJ, Häggroth S. 1948. Über die Ursache des Farbreaktionen des Holzes. Acta Chemica Scandinavia 2: 93-94.
2. Aloni R, Plotkin T. 1985. Wound-induced and naturally occurring regenerative differentiation of xylem in Zea mays L. Planta 163: 126-132.
3. Biggs AR. 1984. Boundary-zone formation in peach bark in response to wound and Cytospora leucostoma infection. Canadian Journal of Botany 62: 2814-2821.
4. Biggs AR. 1986. Phellogen regeneration in injured peach tree bark. Annals of Botany 57: 463-470.
5. Biggs AR, Stobbs LW. 1986. Fine structure of the suberized cell walls in the boundary zone and necrophylactic periderm in wounded peach bark. Canadian Journal of Botany 64: 1606-1610.
6. Brian C, Duron M. 1971. Contribution à l'étude de l'incompatibilité au greffage des combinaisons poirier-cognassier. I. Etude du processus d'union sur du matériel herbacé. Annales de l'Amélioration des Plantes 21: 445-463.
7. Brossier J. 1965. La sélection de porte-greffes du poirier dans les populations naturelles de cognassier. II. Sélection de cognassiers porte-greffes du poirier. Annales de l'Amélioration des Plantes 15: 373-403.
8. Copes D. 1969. Graft union formation in Douglas-Fir. American Journal of Botany 56: 285-289.
9. Crafts AS. 1934. Phloem anatomy in two species of Nicotiana, with notes on the interspecific graft union. Botanical Gazette 95: 592-608.
10. Deloire A, Hébant C. 1983. Le greffage de combinaisons compatibles et incompatibles du genre Prunus: une étude histophysiologique de la zone de jonction. Agronomie 3: 207-212.
11. Dormling I. 1963. Anatomical and histological examination of the union. Studia Forestalia Suedica 13: 1-167.
12. Duquesne J. 1969. Etude de la compatibilité de greffe de quelques cultivars de Prunus armeniaca (Koehne) sur divers types de Prunus. I. Compatibilité des cultivars 'Canino' et 'Rouge du Roussillon' sur divers clones de 'Prunus cerasifera' (Ehrh) et hybrides interspécifiques. Annales de l'Amélioration des Plantes 19: 419-441.
13. Ermel FF, Catesson AM, Poëssel JL. 1995. Early histological diagnosis of apricot/peach x almond graft incompatibility: statistical analysis of data from 5 month-old grafts. Acta Horticulturae 384: 497-503.
14. Errea P, Felipe A, Herrero M. 1994. Graft establishment between compatible and incompatible Prunus spp. Journal of Experimental Botany 45: 393-401.
15. Gur A, Samish M, Lifshitz E. 1968. The role of the cyanogenic glycoside of the quince in the incompatibility between pear cultivars and quince rootstocks. Horticultural Research 8: 113-134.
16. Gur A, Zamet D, Arad E. 1978. A pear rootstock trial in Israel. Scientia Horticulturae 8: 249-264.
17. Jeffree CE, Yeoman MM. 1983. Development of intercellular connections between opposing cells in a graft union. New Phytologist 93: 491-509.
18. Lapins K. 1959. Some symptoms of stock-scion incompatibility of apricot varieties on peach seedling rootstock. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 39: 194-203.
19. McCully ME. 1983. Structural aspects of graft development. In: Moore R, ed. Vegetative compatibility responses in plants, Texas: Baylor University Press, 71-88.
20. Miller H, Barnett JR. 1993. The formation of callus at the graft interface in Sitka Spruce. IAWA Journal 14: 13-21.
21. Moore R. 1982. Further evidence for cell wall deposition during graft formation. Annals of Botany 50: 599-604.
22. Moore R. 1983. Physiological aspects of graft formation. In: Moore R, ed. Vegetative compatibility responses in plants, Texas: Baylor University Press, 89-105.
23. Moore R. 1984. Ultrastructural aspects of graft incompatibility between pear and quince in vitro. Annals of Botany 53: 447-451.
24. Moore R. 1986. Graft incompatibility between pear and quince: the influence of metabolites of Cydonia oblonga on suspension cultures of Pyrus communis. American Journal of Botany 73: 1-4.
25. Moore R, Walker DB. 1981a. Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. I. A structural study of a compatible autograft in Section telephoides (Crassulaceae). American Journal of Botany 68: 820-830.
26. Moore R, Walker DB. 1981b. Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. II. A structural study of an incompatible heterograft between Sedum telephoides (Crassulaceae) and Solanum pennellii (Solanaceae). American Journal of Botany 68: 831-842.
27. Mosse B. 1958. Further observations on growth and union structure of double-grafted pear on quince. Journal of Horticultural Science 33: 186-193.
28. Mosse B. 1962. Graft incompatibility in fruit trees. Technical Communication No. 28. East Malling, Maidstone, Kent, UK: Commonwealth Bureau of Horticulture and Plantation Crops.
29. Mosse B, Scaramuzzi, F. 1956. Observations on the nature and development of structural defects in the unions between pear and quince. Journal of Horticultural Science 31: 47-54.
30. Mueller WC, Greenwood AD. 1978. The ultrastructure of phenolic cells fixed with caffeine. Journal of Experimental Botany 29: 757-764.
31. Mullick DB. 1977. The non-specific nature of defence in bark and wood during wounding, insect and pathogen attack. In: Loewus FA, Runeckles VC, eds. Recent advances in phytochemistry. Volume 11, New York: Plenum Publishing Corp, 395-441.
32. O'Brien TP, Feder N, McCully ME. 1965. Polychromatic staining of plant cell walls by Toluidine Blue O. Protoplasma 59: 367-373.
33. Reynolds ES. 1963. The use of lead citrate at high pH as an electron opaque stain in electron microscopy. Journal of Cell Biology 17: 208-212.
34. Rosenstock G, Kahl G. 1978. Phytohormones and the regulation of cellular processes in aging storage tissues. In: Kahl G, ed. Biochemistry of wounded plant tissues, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter and Co, 623-671.
35. Scaramuzzi F. 1968. Observations sur les greffes de tissus cambiaux de cognassier et de poirier cultivés in vitro. Complex Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences de Paris 267: 601-604.
36. Shimomura T, Fuzihara K. 1977. Physiological study of graft union formation in cactus. II. Role of auxin on vascular connection between stock and scion. Journal of Japanese Society of Horticultural Science 45: 397-406.
37. Soumelidou K, Battey NH, John P, Barnett JR. 1994. The anatomy of the developing bud union and its relationship to dwarfing in apple. Annals of Botany 74: 605-611.
38. Thiery JP. 1967. Mise en évidence des polysaccharides sur coupes fines en microscopic électronique. Journal of Microscopy 6: 987-1018.
39. Tiedemann R. 1989. Graft union development and symplastic phloem contact in the heterograft Cucumis sativus on Cucurbita ficifolia. Journal of Plant Physiology 134: 427-440.
40. Tolivia D, Tolivia J. 1987. Fasga: a new polychromatic method for simultaneous and differential staining of plant tissues. Journal of Microscopy 148: 113-117.
41. Yeoman MM, Brown R. 1976. Implications of the formation of the graft union for organisation in the intact plant. Annals of Botany 40: 1265-1276.