Shade tolerance: When growing tall is not an option

Trends in Plant Science

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 65-71

  Gommers, Charlotte M M ^a   Visser, Eric J W ^b   Onge, Kate R St ^a   Voesenek, Laurentius A C J ^a   Pierik, Ronald ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; ENVIRONMENT; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENE REGULATORY NETWORK; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; LIGHT; PHOTOTRANSDUCTION; PLANT; PLANT DEVELOPMENT; PLANT PHYSIOLOGY; RADIATION EXPOSURE; REVIEW; TREE;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ENVIRONMENT; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, PLANT; GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS; LIGHT; LIGHT SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PLANT DEVELOPMENT; PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL PHENOMENA; PLANTS; TREES;

EID: 84873209474     PISSN: 13601385     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2012.09.008     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Franklin K.A. Shade avoidance. New Phytol. 2008, 179:930-944.
2. Valladares F., Niinemets U. Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2008, 39:237-257.
3. Bierzychudek P. Life histories and demography of shade-tolerant temperate forest herbs: a review. New Phytol. 1982, 90:757-776.
4. Casal J.J. Shade avoidance. Arabidopsis Book 2012, 10:e0157.
5. Smith H. The ecological functions of the phytochrome family. Clues to a transgenic programme of crop improvement. Photochem. Photobiol. 1992, 56:815-822.
6. Morgan P.W., et al. Opportunities to improve adaptability and yield in grasses: lessons from sorghum. Crop Sci. 2002, 42:1791-1799.
7. Hedden P. The genes of the Green Revolution. Trends Genet. 2003, 19:5-9.
8. Nilsson M.C., Wardle D.A. Understory vegetation as a forest ecosystem driver: evidence from the northern Swedish boreal forest. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2005, 3:421-428.
9. Meekins J.F., McCarthy B.C. Competitive ability of Alliaria petiolata (garlic mustard, brassicaceae), an invasive, nonindigenous forest herb. Int. J. Plant Sci. 1999, 160:743-752.
10. Vandenbussche F., et al. Reaching out of the shade. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2005, 8:462-468.
11. Lin C.T. Plant blue-light receptors. Trends Plant Sci. 2000, 5:337-342.
12. Schmitt J., Wulff R.D. Light spectral quality, phytochrome and plant competition. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1993, 8:47-51.
13. Kebrom T.H., Brutnell T.P. The molecular analysis of the shade avoidance syndrome in the grasses has begun. J. Exp. Bot. 2007, 58:3079-3089.
14. Smith H., Whitelam G.C. The shade avoidance syndrome: multiple responses mediated by multiple phytochromes. Plant Cell Environ. 1997, 20:840-844.
15. Whitelam G.C., Johnson C.B. Photomorphogenesis in Impatiens parviflora and other plant species under simulated natural canopy radiations. New Phytol. 1982, 90:611-618.
16. Evans J.R., Poorter H. Photosynthetic acclimation of plants to growth irradiance: the relative importance of specific leaf area and nitrogen partitioning in maximizing carbon gain. Plant Cell Environ. 2001, 24:755-767.
17. Melis A., Harvey G.W. Regulation of photosystem stoichiometry, chlorophyll a and chlorophyll b content and relation to chloroplast ultrastructure. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1981, 637:138-145.
18. Givnish T.J. Adaptation to sun and shade - a whole-plant perspective. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1988, 15:63-92.
19. Morgan D.C., Smith H. A systematic relationship between phytochrome-controlled development and species habitat, for plants grown in simulated natural radiation. Planta 1979, 145:253-258.
20. Niinemets U., Valladares F. Photosynthetic acclimation to simultaneous and interacting environmental stresses along natural light gradients: optimality and constraints. Plant Biol. 2004, 6:254-268.
21. Kitajima K. Relative importance of photosynthetic traits and allocation patterns as correlates of seedling shade tolerance of 13 tropical trees. Oecologia 1994, 98:419-428.
22. Reich P.B., et al. Close association of RGR, leaf and root morphology, seed mass and shade tolerance in seedlings of nine boreal tree species grown in high and low light. Funct. Ecol. 1998, 12:327-338.
23. Cavatte P.C., et al. Could shading reduce the negative impacts of drought on coffee? A morphophysiological analysis. Physiol. Plant. 2012, 144:111-122.
24. Augspurger C.K. Light requirements of neotropical tree seedlings: a comparative study of growth and survival. J. Ecol. 1984, 72:777-795.
25. Gamage H.K. Phenotypic variation in heteroblastic woody species does not contribute to shade survival. AoB Plants 2011, 2011:plr013.
26. Lusk C.H., et al. Why are evergreen leaves so contrary about shade?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2008, 23:299-303.
27. Quail P.H. Phytochromes. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:R504-R507.
28. Lariguet P., Dunand C. Plant photoreceptors: phylogenetic overview. J. Mol. Evol. 2005, 61:559-569.
29. Leivar P., et al. The Arabidopsis phytochrome-interacting factor PIF7, together with PIF3 and PIF4, regulates responses to prolonged red light by modulating phyB levels. Plant Cell 2008, 20:337-352.
30. Li L., et al. Linking photoreceptor excitation to changes in plant architecture. Genes Dev. 2012, 26:785-790.
31. Kidokoro S., et al. The phytochrome-interacting factor PIF7 negatively regulates DREB1 expression under circadian control in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2009, 151:2046-2057.
32. Leivar P., Quail P.H. PIFs: pivotal components in a cellular signaling hub. Trends Plant Sci. 2011, 16:19-28.
33. Lorrain S., et al. Phytochrome interacting factors 4 and 5 redundantly limit seedling de-etiolation in continuous far-red light. Plant J. 2009, 60:449-461.
34. Kim J., et al. Functional characterization of phytochrome interacting factor 3 in phytochrome-mediated light signal transduction. Plant Cell 2003, 15:2399-2407.
35. Monte E., et al. The phytochrome-interacting transcription factor, PIF3, acts early, selectively, and positively in light-induced chloroplast development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101:16091-16098.
36. Stephenson P.G., et al. PIF3 is a repressor of chloroplast development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:7654-7659.
37. Hornitschek P., et al. Phytochrome interacting factors 4 and 5 control seedling growth in changing light conditions by directly controlling auxin signaling. Plant J. 2012, 71:699-711.
38. Keller M.M., et al. Cryptochrome 1 and phytochrome B control shade-avoidance responses in Arabidopsis via partially independent hormonal cascades. Plant J. 2011, 67:195-207.
39. Zimmermann P., et al. Genevestigator. Arabidopsis microarray database and analysis toolbox. Plant Physiol. 2004, 136:2621-2632.
40. Pierik R., et al. The Janus face of ethylene: growth inhibition and stimulation. Trends Plant Sci. 2006, 11:176-183.
41. Keuskamp D.H., et al. Auxin transport through PIN-FORMED 3 (PIN3) controls shade avoidance and fitness during competition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:22740-22744.
42. Beevers L., et al. Phytochrome and hormonal control of expansion and greening of etiolated wheat leaves. Planta 1970, 90:286-294.
43. Qin M., et al. Overexpressed phytochrome C has similar photosensory specificity to phytochrome B but a distinctive capacity to enhance primary leaf expansion. Plant J. 1997, 12:1163-1172.
44. Kamiya Y., Garcia-Martinez J.L. Regulation of gibberellin biosynthesis by light. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 1999, 2:398-403.
45. Djakovic-Petrovic T., et al. DELLA protein function in growth responses to canopy signals. Plant J. 2007, 51:117-126.
46. de Lucas M., et al. A molecular framework for light and gibberellin control of cell elongation. Nature 2008, 451:480-486.
47. Pierik R., et al. Interactions between ethylene and gibberellins in phytochrome-mediated shade avoidance responses in tobacco. Plant Physiol. 2004, 136:2928-2936.
48. Galstyan A., et al. The shade avoidance syndrome in Arabidopsis: a fundamental role for atypical basic helix-loop-helix proteins as transcriptional cofactors. Plant J. 2011, 66:258-267.
49. Roig-Villanova I., et al. Interaction of shade avoidance and auxin responses: a role for two novel atypical bHLH proteins. EMBO J. 2007, 26:4756-4767.
50. Sessa G., et al. A dynamic balance between gene activation and repression regulates the shade avoidance response in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev. 2005, 19:2811-2815.
51. Fairchild C.D., et al. HFR1 encodes an atypical bHLH protein that acts in phytochrome A signal transduction. Genes Dev. 2000, 14:2377-2391.
52. Johnson E., et al. Photoresponses of light-grown phyA mutants of Arabidopsis (phytochrome A is required for the perception of daylength extensions). Plant Physiol. 1994, 105:141-149.
53. Reed J.W., et al. Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in Arabidopsis development. Plant Physiol. 1994, 104:1139-1149.
54. McCormac A., et al. Light-grown plants of transgenic tobacco expressing an introduced oat phytochrome A gene under the control of a constitutive viral promoter exhibit persistent growth inhibition by far-red light. Planta 1992, 188:173-181.
55. Rousseaux M.C., et al. Directed overexpression of PHYA locally suppresses stem elongation and leaf senescence responses to far-red radiation. Plant Cell Environ. 1997, 20:1551-1558.
56. Maloof J.N., et al. Natural variation in light sensitivity of Arabidopsis. Nat. Genet. 2001, 29:441-446.
57. Hall D., et al. Using association mapping to dissect the genetic basis of complex traits in plants. Brief. Funct. Genomics 2010, 9:157-165.
58. Atwell S., et al. Genome-wide association study of 107 phenotypes in Arabidopsis thaliana inbred lines. Nature 2010, 465:627-631.
59. Filiault D.L., Maloof J.N. A genome-wide association study identifies variants underlying the Arabidopsis thaliana shade avoidance response. PLoS Genet. 2012, 8:e1002589.
60. van Zanten M., et al. On the relevance and control of leaf angle. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2010, 29:300-316.
61. Bräutigam A., Gowik U. What can next generation sequencing do for you? Next generation sequencing as a valuable tool in plant research. Plant Biol. 2010, 12:831-841.
62. Lister R., et al. Next is now: new technologies for sequencing of genomes, transcriptomes, and beyond. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2009, 12:107-118.
63. Mommer L., et al. Ecophysiological determinants of plant performance under flooding: a comparative study of seven plant families. J. Ecol. 2006, 94:1117-1129.
64. Rijnders J.G.H.M., et al. Ethylene enhances gibberellin levels and petiole sensitivity in flooding-tolerant Rumex palustris but not in flooding-intolerant R. acetosa. Planta 1997, 203:20-25.
65. Bailey-Serres J., Voesenek L.A. Flooding stress: acclimations and genetic diversity. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2008, 59:313-339.
66. Benschop J.J., et al. Contrasting interactions between ethylene and abscisic acid in Rumex species differing in submergence tolerance. Plant J. 2005, 44:756-768.
67. Chen X., et al. Endogenous abscisic acid as a key switch for natural variation in flooding-induced shoot elongation. Plant Physiol. 2010, 154:969-977.
68. Hattori Y., et al. The ethylene response factors SNORKEL1 and SNORKEL2 allow rice to adapt to deep water. Nature 2009, 460:1026-1030.
69. Xu K., et al. Sub1A is an ethylene-response-factor-like gene that confers submergence tolerance to rice. Nature 2006, 442:705-708.
70. Sicard A., et al. Genetics, evolution, and adaptive significance of the selfing syndrome in the genus Capsella. Plant Cell 2011, 23:3156-3171.
71. Slotte T., et al. Genetic architecture and adaptive significance of the selfing syndrome in Capsella. Evolution 2012, 66:1360-1374.
72. Quail P.H. Phytochrome photosensory signalling networks. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2002, 3:85-93.
73. Ni M., et al. Binding of phytochrome B to its nuclear signalling partner PIF3 is reversibly induced by light. Nature 1999, 400:781-784.
74. Leivar P., et al. Dynamic antagonism between phytochromes and PIF family basic helix-loop-helix factors induces selective reciprocal responses to light and shade in a rapidly responsive transcriptional network in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2012, 24:1398-1419.
75. Lorrain S., et al. Phytochrome-mediated inhibition of shade avoidance involves degradation of growth-promoting bHLH transcription factors. Plant J. 2008, 53:312-323.
76. Tao Y., et al. Rapid synthesis of auxin via a new tryptophan-dependent pathway is required for shade avoidance in plants. Cell 2008, 133:164-176.
77. Pierik R., et al. Auxin and ethylene regulate elongation responses to neighbor proximity signals independent of gibberellin and DELLA proteins in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2009, 149:1701-1712.
78. Steindler C., et al. Shade avoidance responses are mediated by the ATHB-2 HD-zip protein, a negative regulator of gene expression. Development 1999, 126:4235-4245.
79. Kozuka T., et al. Involvement of auxin and brassinosteroid in the regulation of petiole elongation under the shade. Plant Physiol. 2010, 153:1608-1618.
80. Keuskamp D.H., et al. Blue-light-mediated shade avoidance requires combined auxin and brassinosteroid action in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant J. 2011, 67:208-217.
81. Kegge W., Pierik R. Biogenic volatile organic compounds and plant competition. Trends Plant Sci. 2010, 15:126-132.
82. Pierik R., et al. Ethylene is required in tobacco to successfully compete with proximate neighbours. Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26:1229-1234.
83. Hornitschek P., et al. Inhibition of the shade avoidance response by formation of non-DNA binding bHLH heterodimers. EMBO J. 2009, 28:3893-3902.
84. Robson P.R.H., et al. Genetic engineering of harvest index in tobacco through overexpression of a phytochrome gene. Nat. Biotechnol. 1996, 14:995-998.