Cited by 31Plant Molecular Biology ResearchPlant Genetic and Mutation StudiesPlant Parasitism and Resistance

Pea rms6 mutants exhibit increased basal branching

Open access
Rameau, Catherine, Murfet, Ian C., Laucou, Valerie, Floyd, Robert S., Morris, Suzanne E., Beveridge, Christine A.·2002·Physiologia Plantarum

Abstract

Our studies on two branching mutants of pea (Pisum sativum L.) have identified a further Ramosus locus, Rms6, with two recessive or partially recessive mutant alleles: rms6‐1 (type line S2‐271) and rms6‐2 (type line K586). Mutants rms6‐1 and rms6‐2 were derived from dwarf and tall cultivars, Solara and Torsdag, respectively. The rms6 mutants are characterized by increased branching from basal nodes. In contrast, mutants rms1 through rms5 have increased branching from both basal and aerial (upper stem) nodes. Buds at the cotyledonary node of wild‐type (WT) plants remain dormant but in rms6 plants these buds were usually released from dormancy. Their growth was either subsequently inhibited, sometimes even prior to emergence above ground, or they grew into secondary stems. The mutant phenotype was strongest for rms6‐1 on the dwarf background. Although rms6‐2 had a weak single‐mutant phenotype, the rms3‐1 rms6‐2 double mutant showed clear transgression and an additive branching phenotype, with a total lateral length almost 2‐fold greater than rms3‐1 and nearly 5‐fold greater than rms6‐2. Grafting studies between WT and rms6‐1 plants demonstrated the primary action of Rms6 may be confined to the shoot. Young WT and rms6‐1 shoots had similar auxin levels, and decapitated plants had a similar magnitude of response to applied auxin. Abscisic acid levels were elevated 2‐fold at node 2 of young rms6‐1 plants. The Rms6 locus mapped to the R to Gp segment of linkage group V (chromosome 3). The rms6 mutants will be useful for basic research and also have possible agronomical value.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1399-3054.2002.1150316.x

Cites

2 of 2 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
Rameau, C., Murfet, I. C., Laucou, V., Floyd, R. S., Morris, S. E., & Beveridge, C. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Beveridge, Christine A.
Venue
Physiologia Plantarum
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-06-25
Volume
115
Issue
3
Pages
458-467
ISSN
  • 0031-9317 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3054
OpenAlex
W2037402980
Cited by
31
References
2
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physiologia Plantarum (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Australian Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Parasitism and Resistance
Keywords
pea, Pisum sativum, bud dormancy release, auxin, abscisic acid, transgressive segregation, shoot apical meristem, chromosome 3, linkage group V

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