This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fox, L. R. Articles by Hillman, W. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fox, L. R. Articles by Hillman, W. S. Agricola Articles by Fox, L. R. Articles by Hillman, W. S.

Articles

Differences in Photoresponse and Phytochrome Spectrophotometry Between Etiolated and De-etiolated Pea Stem Tissue ¹

Biology Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973

Morphologically similar pea plants having a 4-fold difference in spectrophoto-metrically detectable phytochrome can be produced by pretreatment of etiolated plants with red light (R) or with red and far-red light combined (RF). A search for response differences which could be ascribed to differences in phytochrome content has resulted only in the establishment of differences due to de-etiolation. Segments of etiolated plants differ from those of plants de-etiolated by R and RF pretreatments in 2 ways. Segments from etiolated plants appear to respond rapidly to the far-red absorbing form of phytochrome (P_FR), while segments from de-etiolated plants do not respond rapidly to P_FR. This statement is based upon 2 observations: (i) the red light induced growth inhibition in segments from etiolated plants rapidly escapes reversibility by far-red light, while with segments from R or RF pretreated plants, the red light effect is fully reversed by subsequent far-red light for up to 2 hr; and (ii) segments from etiolated plants were inhibited to a greater degree than were segments from RF pretreated plants when various photostationary state levels of P_FR were maintained for 30 or 90 min and then removed by photoconversion to P_R. The in vivo nonphotochemical transformation curves of the phytochrome of etiolated and RF pretreated plants appear to differ in 2 related respects: (i) the amount of phytochrome destroyed in de-etiolated tissue is greater than that in etiolated tissue, perhaps as a result of the fact that (ii) the rate and extent of apparent reversion of P_FR to P_R in etiolated tissue is about twice that in de-etiolated tissue.