Cited by 52Plant Molecular Biology ResearchDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationPlant Parasitism and Resistance

Meristem maintenance and compound-leaf patterning utilize common genetic mechanisms in tomato

Brand, Arnon, Shirding, Neti, Shleizer, Sharona, Ori, Naomi·2007·Planta

Abstract

Balancing shoot apical meristem (SAM) maintenance and organ formation from its flanks is essential for proper plant growth and development and for the flexibility of organ production in response to internal and external cues. Leaves are formed at the SAM flanks and display a wide variability in size and form. Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) leaves are compound with lobed margins. We exploited 18 recessive tomato mutants, representing four distinct phenotypic classes and six complementation groups, to track the genetic mechanisms involved in meristem function and compound-leaf patterning in tomato. In goblet (gob) mutants, the SAM terminates following cotyledon production, but occasionally partially recovers and produces simple leaves. expelled shoot (exp) meristems terminate after the production of several leaves, and these leaves show a reduced level of compoundness. short pedicel (spd) mutants are bushy, with impaired meristem structure, compact inflorescences, short pedicels and less compound leaves. In multi drop (mud) mutants, the leaves are more compound and the SAM tends to divide into two active meristems after the production of a few leaves. The range of leaf-compoundness phenotypes observed in these mutants suggests that compound-leaf patterning involves an array of genetic factors, which act successively to elaborate leaf shape. Furthermore, the results indicate that similar mechanisms underlie SAM activity and compound-leaf patterning in tomato.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00425-007-0540-0

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brand, A., Shirding, N., Shleizer, S., & Ori, N.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Corresponding author
Ori, Naomi
Venue
Planta
Published
2007-05-23
Volume
226
Issue
4
Pages
941-951
ISSN
  • 0032-0935 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2048
OpenAlex
W2083291340
Cited by
52
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Planta (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Parasitism and Resistance
Keywords
shoot apical meristem, meristem maintenance, tomato, recessive mutants, complementation groups, leaf shape, inflorescence development
MeSH terms
Mutation, Phenotype, Plant Proteins, Gene Expression, Homeodomain Proteins, Plant Leaves, Meristem, Solanum lycopersicum, Body Patterning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review