DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research Annals of Botany 80: 571–582, 1997 REVIEW ARTICLE The Fundamental Relevance of Morphology and Morphogenesis to Plant Research ROLF SATTLER and ROLF RUTISHAUSER Biology Department, McGill Uniersity, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1B1 and Institut fuX r Systematische Botanik und Botanischer Garten, UniersitaX tZuXrich, Zollikerstrasse 107, CH-8008 ZuX rich, Switzerland Received: 21 August 1996 Accepted: 3 June 1997 Plant morphology, including morphogenesis, remains relevant to practically all disciplines of plant biology such as molecular genetics, physiology, ecology, evolutionary biology and systematics. This relevance derives from the fact that other disciplines refer to or imply morphological concepts, conceptual frameworks of morphology, and morphological theories. Most commonly, morphology is equated with classical morphology and its conceptual framework. According to this, flowering plants and certain other taxa are reduced to the mutually exclusive categories of root, stem (caulome) and leaf (phyllome). This ignores the fact that plant morphology has undergone fundamental conceptual, theoretical and philosophical innovation in recent times. These changes, when recognized, can fundamentally affect research in various disciplines of plant biology. They may even change the questions that are asked and thus may affect the direction of future research. If, for example, plant diversity and evolution are seen as a dynamic continuum, then compound leaves can be seen as intermediate between simple leaves and whole shoots. Recent results in molecular genetics support this view. Phylogenetically, this could mean that compound leaves are the result of developmental hybridization, i.e. partial homeosis. Many other examples are given to illustrate the relevance and potential impact of basic conceptual and theoretical innovations in plant morphology. # 1997 Annals of Botany Company Key words: Plant morphology, plant morphogenesis, molecular plant genetics, developmental genetics, plant physiology, plant ecology, evolutionary plant biology, plant systematics, cladistics, continuum morphology, process morphology, process philosophy, perspectivism, complementarity, homeosis, homeotic mutants, developmental hybridization, developmental mosaics, homology, metamerism. recognize, of course, that external and internal form are INTRODUCTION intimately related. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: (1) What is plant morphology? Literally, the term ‘mor- to show that morphological concepts are used or implied in phology’ is derived from two Greek roots: morphe, which all major disciplines of plant biology such as genetics, means form and}or structure, and logos, meaning discourse molecular biology, physiology, ecology, systematics, evol- or investigation. Thus, plant morphology is the investigation utionary biology, etc. Therefore, these disciplines are more of plant form and}or structure. This can be interpreted in or less influenced by morphology; and (2) to show that the either a narrow or a broad sense (e.g. Sattler, 1978). In the disciplines of plant biology are affected to some extent by narrow sense, morphology refers only to external form (see, progress in plant morphology which comprises new em- for example, Bell, 1991). In the broad sense, it comprises pirical data, new concepts and conceptual frameworks, and form and structure at all organizational levels, i.e. the form new ways of thinking. Whereas the relevance of new em- and structure of whole plants, organs, tissues, cells, cell pirical data is generally recognized, theoretical and philo- organelles, molecules, etc. Thus, morphology sensu lato sophical innovations are often overlooked. Many plant includes anatomy and even structural biochemistry. biologists believe that the basic conceptual framework and Regardless of whether morphology is defined narrowly or way of thinking of morphology were well established in the broadly, it deals with the change of form during time, 19th and early 20th century. Therefore, it is usually taken during ontogeny and phylogeny. Since morphogenesis is the for granted, that if reference to morphology is necessary, it development of form, especially during ontogeny, mor- must be in terms of classical morphology, i.e. in terms of the phology comprises morphogenesis. We included ‘morpho- categories root, stem, and leaf for most higher plants. Most genesis’ in the title of this paper for two reasons: firstly to textbooks and other publications reinforce this belief make it clear that we do not understand morphology in an because they tend to ignore more recent theoretical and extremely narrow and static sense according to which it philosophical innovations. Thus, the student is misled to would refer only to mature form or structure, and secondly think that fundamental progress in morphology has come to to emphasize that the dynamics of form and structure are of an end. special concern to us. However, there have been major theoretical and philo- The emphasis in this paper will be on plant morphology sophical innovations during last 30 years or so, some of the sensu stricto, i.e. external form as it changes during time. We most fundamental of which include: (1) the introduction of 0305-7364}97}110571­12 $25.00}0 bo970474 # 1997 Annals of Botany Company 572 Sattler and Rutishauser—Releance of Morphology the Lindenmayer languages or algorithms (L-Systems) (e.g. variate analysis (Jeune and Sattler, 1992). In this dynamic Lindenmayer, 1968, 1978) culminating in Prusinkiewicz’ continuum, the process combinations that we call typical computer simulations of plant form and development (e.g. roots, shoots, stems, leaves and trichomes are linked by Prusinkiewicz and Lindenmayer, 1990); (2) the development intermediate process combinations that share processes of of fractals, chaos theory and nonlinear dynamics and its the typical structures to various degrees. application to the study of plant form (e.g. Mandelbrot, All of the above fundamental innovations (and others 1982; Barabe! , 1991; Peitgen, Jurgens and Saupe, 1992; that have not been mentioned) can have an impact on Kaandorp, 1994; Corbit and Garbary, 1995; Oldeman and research in the various botanical disciplines that rely on Vester, 1996); (3) the elaboration of the metameric and morphological concepts. Since it is beyond the scope of a modular concept and the idea of the plant as a metapopu- single paper to examine the impact of all major innovations lation facilitating the integration of morphology and of the past decades, we shall focus on the relevance of the population biology (White, 1979, 1984); (4) the analysis of notion of the dynamic continuum, i.e. the continuum view plant architecture in terms of a continuum of architectural of plant form and process morphology. However, we shall models (Halle! , Oldeman and Tomlinson, 1978; Edelin, not totally ignore other innovations. 1991; Oldeman and Vester, 1996); (5) the elaboration of Process morphology and other fundamental innovations perspectivism (general principle of complementarity) ac- affect not only the outcome of research in other fields but cording to which contrasting or contradictory models (or may even change the questions that are asked and thus conceptual frameworks) are complementary (not antag- influence the direction in which research proceeds (Sattler, onistic) to each other (see Rutishauser and Sattler, 1985, 1990, 1993). For example, instead of asking ‘Is it this or 1987, 1989). An example is the complementarity of the that?’, one would ask ‘How is it related to this or that?’ classical model (according to which the shoot consists of (this or that being other processes or process combinations). stem(s) and leaves) and the metameric model that constructs Thus, a categorical world view is superseded (or at least the whole shoot of metamers only (Rutishauser and Sattler, complemented) by a dynamic relational view. If, in addition, 1985: Table 1 and below); (6) the rediscovery of homeosis it is recognized that relations are not only external but also which has led to an increased integration of molecular internal, this has further consequences that have been genetics and morphogenesis (see, for example, Meyen, 1973, elaborated by various process thinkers (e.g. Cobb, 1988; 1987; Cusset, 1982; Sattler, 1988, 1994; Rutishauser, 1989, Birch, 1990). 1993; Coen, 1991, Meyerowitz, 1995). Homeosis also fundamentally affects the notion of homology (Sattler, 1988, 1994; see point (8) below; (7) the elaboration of a continuum view of plant form (Sattler, 1974) and its GENETICS, MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND confirmation by multivariate analysis (Sattler and Jeune, MORPHOLOGY 1992; Cusset, 1994). Philosophically, this view is based on, Genotype and phenotype or compatible with, fuzzy logic and fuzzy thinking (Kosko, 1993): the world is not only seen in terms of ‘either-or’, Traditionally, genetics deals with the relationship of black or white, this or that, but in terms of ‘more or less’ of genotype to phenotype, genes to traits, and their inheritance. which the ‘either-or’ becomes a special extreme case. Thus, The phenotype and its traits are often morphological Aristotle’s basic logical law ‘A or not-A’ is superseded (see characters such as stem length, flower site, seed form. Thus, Kosko, 1993; for applications in plant development see morphology and morphological concepts play an important Rutishauser, 1995); (8) the development of the notion of role in genetic analysis. This has been so from the beginnings partial homology (Sattler, 1966; Meyen, 1973) and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant Physiology
    PLANT PHYSIOLOGY Vince Ördög Created by XMLmind XSL-FO Converter. PLANT PHYSIOLOGY Vince Ördög Publication date 2011 Created by XMLmind XSL-FO Converter. Table of Contents Cover .................................................................................................................................................. v 1. Preface ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Water and nutrients in plant ............................................................................................................ 2 1. Water balance of plant .......................................................................................................... 2 1.1. Water potential ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Absorption by roots .................................................................................................. 6 1.3. Transport through the xylem .................................................................................... 8 1.4. Transpiration ............................................................................................................. 9 1.5. Plant water status .................................................................................................... 11 1.6. Influence of extreme water supply .......................................................................... 12 2. Nutrient supply of plant .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Unusual Morphologies in Lentibulariaceae (Bladderworts and Allies) And
    Annals of Botany 117: 811–832, 2016 doi:10.1093/aob/mcv172, available online at www.aob.oxfordjournals.org REVIEW: PART OF A SPECIAL ISSUE ON DEVELOPMENTAL ROBUSTNESS AND SPECIES DIVERSITY Evolution of unusual morphologies in Lentibulariaceae (bladderworts and allies) and Podostemaceae (river-weeds): a pictorial report at the interface of developmental biology and morphological diversification Rolf Rutishauser* Institute of Systematic Botany, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland * For correspondence. E-mail [email protected] Received: 30 July 2015 Returned for revision: 19 August 2015 Accepted: 25 September 2015 Published electronically: 20 November 2015 Background Various groups of flowering plants reveal profound (‘saltational’) changes of their bauplans (archi- tectural rules) as compared with related taxa. These plants are known as morphological misfits that appear as rather Downloaded from large morphological deviations from the norm. Some of them emerged as morphological key innovations (perhaps ‘hopeful monsters’) that gave rise to new evolutionary lines of organisms, based on (major) genetic changes. Scope This pictorial report places emphasis on released bauplans as typical for bladderworts (Utricularia,approx. 230 secies, Lentibulariaceae) and river-weeds (Podostemaceae, three subfamilies, approx. 54 genera, approx. 310 species). Bladderworts (Utricularia) are carnivorous, possessing sucking traps. They live as submerged aquatics (except for their flowers), as humid terrestrials or as epiphytes. Most Podostemaceae are restricted to rocks in tropi- http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/ cal river-rapids and waterfalls. They survive as submerged haptophytes in these extreme habitats during the rainy season, emerging with their flowers afterwards. The recent scientific progress in developmental biology and evolu- tionary history of both Lentibulariaceae and Podostemaceae is summarized.
    [Show full text]
  • Goethe's Plant Morphology: the Seeds of Evolution
    JIDRJournalofInterdisciplinaryResearch Goethe’s Plant Morphology: The Seeds of Evolution TANYA KELLEY It has long been debated whether botanist Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778), and the scientific writing of Johann the continuous view of nature, as Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) exemplified in the work of the English provided the seeds for the theory of naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882). evolution. Scholars have argued both Although best known for his sides with equal passion. German literary works, such as Faust, Die Leiden biologist and philosopher, Ernst Haeckel des jungen Werther, and Wilhelm (1834-1919) wrote, “Jean and Lamarck Meister, Goethe was also deeply and Wolfgang Goethe stand at the head involved with the sciences. Some of his of all the great philosophers of nature biographers lament that Goethe’s literary who first established a theory of organic productivity was impeded by all the time development, and who are the illustrious he spent pursuing his interests in fellow workers of Darwin.”1 Taking the comparative anatomy, metallurgy, opposite stance was Chancellor of Berlin meteorology, color theory and botany.3 University, Emil du Bois Reymond Goethe himself said that he valued his (1818-1896). Du Bois was embarrassed work as a scientist more than his poetic by Goethe’s forays into science. He work.4 He pursued a wide range of wrote, “Beside the poet, the scientist interests over the course of his 83 years Goethe fades into the background. Let of life. Until the very end of his life he us at long last put him to rest.”2 I argue was vitally interested in science.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Cell Cell History Cell Structures and Functions
    Introduction to the cell cell history cell structures and functions CK-12 Foundation December 16, 2009 CK-12 Foundation is a non-profit organization with a mission to reduce the cost of textbook materials for the K-12 market both in the U.S. and worldwide. Using an open-content, web-based collaborative model termed the “FlexBook,” CK-12 intends to pioneer the generation and distribution of high quality educational content that will serve both as core text as well as provide an adaptive environment for learning. Copyright ©2009 CK-12 Foundation This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA. Contents 1 Cell structure and function dec 16 5 1.1 Lesson 3.1: Introduction to Cells .................................. 5 3 www.ck12.org www.ck12.org 4 Chapter 1 Cell structure and function dec 16 1.1 Lesson 3.1: Introduction to Cells Lesson Objectives • Identify the scientists that first observed cells. • Outline the importance of microscopes in the discovery of cells. • Summarize what the cell theory proposes. • Identify the limitations on cell size. • Identify the four parts common to all cells. • Compare prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. Introduction Knowing the make up of cells and how cells work is necessary to all of the biological sciences. Learning about the similarities and differences between cell types is particularly important to the fields of cell biology and molecular biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Development and Cell Cycle Activity of the Root Apical Meristem in the Fern Ceratopteris Richardii
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Article Development and Cell Cycle Activity of the Root Apical Meristem in the Fern Ceratopteris richardii Alejandro Aragón-Raygoza 1,2 , Alejandra Vasco 3, Ikram Blilou 4, Luis Herrera-Estrella 2,5 and Alfredo Cruz-Ramírez 1,* 1 Molecular and Developmental Complexity Group at Unidad de Genómica Avanzada, Laboratorio Nacional de Genómica para la Biodiversidad, Cinvestav Sede Irapuato, Km. 9.6 Libramiento Norte Carretera, Irapuato-León, Irapuato 36821, Guanajuato, Mexico; [email protected] 2 Metabolic Engineering Group, Unidad de Genómica Avanzada, Laboratorio Nacional de Genómica para la Biodiversidad, Cinvestav Sede Irapuato, Km. 9.6 Libramiento Norte Carretera, Irapuato-León, Irapuato 36821, Guanajuato, Mexico; [email protected] 3 Botanical Research Institute of Texas (BRIT), Fort Worth, TX 76107-3400, USA; [email protected] 4 Laboratory of Plant Cell and Developmental Biology, Division of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Engineering (BESE), King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] 5 Institute of Genomics for Crop Abiotic Stress Tolerance, Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 27 October 2020; Accepted: 26 November 2020; Published: 4 December 2020 Abstract: Ferns are a representative clade in plant evolution although underestimated in the genomic era. Ceratopteris richardii is an emergent model for developmental processes in ferns, yet a complete scheme of the different growth stages is necessary. Here, we present a developmental analysis, at the tissue and cellular levels, of the first shoot-borne root of Ceratopteris.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological Description of Plants: New Perspectives in Development and Evolution
    ® International Journal of Plant Developmental Biology ©2010 Global Science Books Morphological Description of Plants: New Perspectives in Development and Evolution 1* 2 Emilio Cervantes • Juana G . de Diego 1 IRNASA-CSIC. Apartado 257. 37080. Salamanca. Spain 2 Dept Bioquímica y Biología Molecular. Campus Miguel de Unamuno. Universidad de Salamanca. Spain Corresponding author : * [email protected] ABSTRACT The morphological description of plants has been fundamental in the history of botany and provided the keys for taxonomy. Nevertheless, in biology, a discipline governed by the interest in function and based on reductionist approaches, the analysis of forms has been relegated to second place. Plants contain organs and structures that resemble geometrical forms. Plant ontogeny may be seen as a sequence of growth processes including periods of continuous growth with modification that stop at crucial points often represented by structures of remarkable similarity to geometrical figures. Instead of the tradition in developmental studies giving more importance to animal models, we propose that the modular type of plant development may serve to remark conceptual aspects in that may be useful in studies with animals and contribute to original views of evolution. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Keywords: concepts, description, geometry, structure INTRODUCTION: PLANTS OFFER NEW reflects a more general situation in Biology, a discipline APPROACHES TO DEVELOPMENT that has matured from the experimental protocols and views of biochemistry, where the predominant role of experimen- The study of development is today a major biological disci- tation has contributed to a decline in basic aspects that need pline. Although it was traditionally more focused in animal to be more descriptive, such as those related with mor- systems, increased emphasis in plant development may phology.
    [Show full text]
  • Phyllotaxis: a Remarkable Example of Developmental Canalization in Plants Christophe Godin, Christophe Golé, Stéphane Douady
    Phyllotaxis: a remarkable example of developmental canalization in plants Christophe Godin, Christophe Golé, Stéphane Douady To cite this version: Christophe Godin, Christophe Golé, Stéphane Douady. Phyllotaxis: a remarkable example of devel- opmental canalization in plants. 2019. hal-02370969 HAL Id: hal-02370969 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02370969 Preprint submitted on 19 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Phyllotaxis: a remarkable example of developmental canalization in plants Christophe Godin, Christophe Gol´e,St´ephaneDouady September 2019 Abstract Why living forms develop in a relatively robust manner, despite various sources of internal or external variability, is a fundamental question in developmental biology. Part of the answer relies on the notion of developmental constraints: at any stage of ontogenenesis, morphogenetic processes are constrained to operate within the context of the current organism being built, which is thought to bias or to limit phenotype variability. One universal aspect of this context is the shape of the organism itself that progressively channels the development of the organism toward its final shape. Here, we illustrate this notion with plants, where conspicuous patterns are formed by the lateral organs produced by apical meristems.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Development Series Editor Paul M
    VOLUME NINETY ONE CURRENT TOPICS IN DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Plant Development Series Editor Paul M. Wassarman Department of Developmental and Regenerative Biology Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York, NY 10029-6574 USA Olivier Pourquié Institut de Génétique et de Biologie Cellulaire et Moléculaire (IGBMC) Inserm U964, CNRS (UMR 7104) Université de Strasbourg Illkirch France Editorial Board Blanche Capel Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC, USA B. Denis Duboule Department of Zoology and Animal Biology NCCR ‘Frontiers in Genetics’ Geneva, Switzerland Anne Ephrussi European Molecular Biology Laboratory Heidelberg, Germany Janet Heasman Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center Department of Pediatrics Cincinnati, OH, USA Julian Lewis Vertebrate Development Laboratory Cancer Research UK London Research Institute London WC2A 3PX, UK Yoshiki Sasai Director of the Neurogenesis and Organogenesis Group RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology Chuo, Japan Philippe Soriano Department of Developmental and Regenerative Biology Mount Sinai Medical School New York, USA Cliff Tabin Harvard Medical School Department of Genetics Boston, MA, USA Founding Editors A. A. Moscona Alberto Monroy VOLUME NINETY ONE CURRENT TOPICS IN DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Plant Development Edited by MARJA C. P. TIMMERMANS Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Cold Spring Harbor New York, USA AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier 525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, USA 30 Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Burlington, MA 01803, USA 32, Jamestown Road, London NW1 7BY, UK Linacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP, UK First edition 2010 Copyright Ó 2010 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure, Function, and Biosynthesis of Plant Cell Wall Pectic Polysaccharides
    Carbohydrate Research 344 (2009) 1879–1900 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Carbohydrate Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/carres The structure, function, and biosynthesis of plant cell wall pectic polysaccharides Kerry Hosmer Caffall a, Debra Mohnen a,b,* a University of Georgia, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, 315 Riverbend Road Athens, GA 30602, United States b DOE BioEnergy Science Center (BESC), 315 Riverbend Road Athens, GA 30602, United States article info abstract Article history: Plant cell walls consist of carbohydrate, protein, and aromatic compounds and are essential to the proper Received 18 November 2008 growth and development of plants. The carbohydrate components make up 90% of the primary wall, Received in revised form 4 May 2009 and are critical to wall function. There is a diversity of polysaccharides that make up the wall and that Accepted 6 May 2009 are classified as one of three types: cellulose, hemicellulose, or pectin. The pectins, which are most abun- Available online 2 June 2009 dant in the plant primary cell walls and the middle lamellae, are a class of molecules defined by the pres- ence of galacturonic acid. The pectic polysaccharides include the galacturonans (homogalacturonan, Keywords: substituted galacturonans, and RG-II) and rhamnogalacturonan-I. Galacturonans have a backbone that Cell wall polysaccharides consists of -1,4-linked galacturonic acid. The identification of glycosyltransferases involved in pectin Galacturonan a Glycosyltransferases synthesis is essential to the study of cell wall function in plant growth and development and for maxi- Homogalacturonan mizing the value and use of plant polysaccharides in industry and human health.
    [Show full text]
  • Lab 2: Plant Morphology: Leaves
    Lab 2: Leaves 1 Name: ______________________________________ Date/Lab time: _________________ Lab 2: Plant Morphology: Leaves Supplies: Carnivorous plant Leaf types Cactus with needles Simple- Succulent leafed plant Sessile- without petiole Monocots and Dicots Compound- Equisetum Pinnate Mother of 1000’s Palmate Ginkgo , pine, fern, etc. Vocabulary to know: Abaxial surface, Adaxial surface, Blade, Compound leaves, Leaflet, Lobed, Midrib, Palmate compound leaf , Petiole, Phyllotaxis, Pinnate compound leaf , Serrated, Sessile leaves, Simple leaves. Introduction: A leaf is defined by its formation (during its very early stage, a leaf extends over and protects the shoot tip) (google shoot meristem). Find a live shoot tip on a plant supplied in lab. Note that you have to dig through a lot of very young leaves to get to it. This definition holds true for even modified leaves. Look at the shoot tip of the cactus (ouch! don't touch it!). Note the cactus spines (needles) form over the shoot tip, thus needles are leaves, though highly modified. Another common feature of leaves is the presence of axillary buds (see figure on next page). Locate a leave's axillary bud just above the point where the leaf attaches to the stem. Axillary buds have the potential of forming new branches or flowers. Leaf Arraignment on Stem The arraignment of leaves on a branch is called phyllotaxis . Note branches with alternate phyllotaxis (leaves arranged alternately one per node), opposite phyllotaxis (leaves arranged 2 per node) or whorled phyllotaxis (more than 2 leaves per node). Identify plants with these types of phyllotaxis. Whorled phyllotaxis is less common. See sweet woodruff and horsetail ( Equisetum ) for examples.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant:Animal Cell Comparison
    Comparing Plant And Animal Cells http://khanacademy.org/video?v=Hmwvj9X4GNY Plant Cells shape - most plant cells are squarish or rectangular in shape. amyloplast (starch storage organelle)- an organelle in some plant cells that stores starch. Amyloplasts are found in starchy plants like tubers and fruits. cell membrane - the thin layer of protein and fat that surrounds the cell, but is inside the cell wall. The cell membrane is semipermeable, allowing some substances to pass into the cell and blocking others. cell wall - a thick, rigid membrane that surrounds a plant cell. This layer of cellulose fiber gives the cell most of its support and structure. The cell wall also bonds with other cell walls to form the structure of the plant. chloroplast - an elongated or disc-shaped organelle containing chlorophyll. Photosynthesis (in which energy from sunlight is converted into chemical energy - food) takes place in the chloroplasts. chlorophyll - chlorophyll is a molecule that can use light energy from sunlight to turn water and carbon dioxide gas into glucose and oxygen (i.e. photosynthesis). Chlorophyll is green. cytoplasm - the jellylike material outside the cell nucleus in which the organelles are located. Golgi body - (or the golgi apparatus or golgi complex) a flattened, layered, sac-like organelle that looks like a stack of pancakes and is located near the nucleus. The golgi body modifies, processes and packages proteins, lipids and carbohydrates into membrane-bound vesicles for "export" from the cell. lysosome - vesicles containing digestive enzymes. Where the digestion of cell nutrients takes place. mitochondrion - spherical to rod-shaped organelles with a double membrane.
    [Show full text]
  • PLANT MORPHOLOGY: Vegetative & Reproductive
    PLANT MORPHOLOGY: Vegetative & Reproductive Study of form, shape or structure of a plant and its parts Vegetative vs. reproductive morphology http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Peanut_plant_NSRW.jpg Vegetative morphology http://faculty.baruch.cuny.edu/jwahlert/bio1003/images/anthophyta/peanut_cotyledon.jpg Seed = starting point of plant after fertilization; a young plant in which development is arrested and the plant is dormant. Monocotyledon vs. dicotyledon cotyledon = leaf developed at 1st node of embryo (seed leaf). “Textbook” plant http://bio1903.nicerweb.com/Locked/media/ch35/35_02AngiospermStructure.jpg Stem variation Stem variation http://www2.mcdaniel.edu/Biology/botf99/stems&leaves/barrel.jpg http://www.puc.edu/Faculty/Gilbert_Muth/art0042.jpg http://www2.mcdaniel.edu/Biology/botf99/stems&leaves/xstawb.gif http://biology.uwsp.edu/courses/botlab/images/1854$.jpg Vegetative morphology Leaf variation Leaf variation Leaf variation Vegetative morphology If the primary root persists, it is called a “true root” and may take the following forms: taproot = single main root (descends vertically) with small lateral roots. fibrous roots = many divided roots of +/- equal size & thickness. http://oregonstate.edu/dept/nursery-weeds/weedspeciespage/OXALIS/oxalis_taproot.jpg adventitious roots = roots that originate from stem (or leaf tissue) rather than from the true root. All roots on monocots are adventitious. (e.g., corn and other grasses). http://plant-disease.ippc.orst.edu/plant_images/StrawberryRootLesion.JPG Root variation http://bio1903.nicerweb.com/Locked/media/ch35/35_04RootDiversity.jpg Flower variation http://130.54.82.4/members/Okuyama/yudai_e.htm Reproductive morphology: flower Yuan Yaowu Flower parts pedicel receptacle sepals petals Yuan Yaowu Flower parts Pedicel = (Latin: ped “foot”) stalk of a flower.
    [Show full text]