Abstract
Flowering ofChenopodium rubrum seedlings fed different sugars at a concentration of 0.6 and 0.4 M, reap, during a single inductive cycle was stimulated or inhibited in dependence on the conditions of germination and initial growth. Plants allowed to germinate at alternating temperatures of 28 °C and 5 °C showed a slower initial growth and their development was stimulated by some sugars as compared to controls induced in the absence of sugars. Plants germinated at alternating temperatures of 32 °C and 5 °C exhibited a rapid initial growth and flowering was inhibited after induction in the presence of sugars. On the other hand, development proceeded more rapidly in control plants induced in the absence of sugars after germination at the higher temperature than after germination at the lower one. The differences between the two variants quoted above could be observed also after induction by two 16 h dark cycles. Glucose and sucrose were most effective in stimulating flowering under appropriate conditions of germination. Fructose was less effective and the action of maltose was very weak. Xylose, ribose and galactose were innocuous, while arabinose, glucoso-6-phosphate and mannitol were toxic to the plants. The sugars inhibited root growth in all cases and led to an increase in starch accumulation in the underground and overground plant organs. At a concentration of 0.6 M they mostly inhibited the length of the cotyledons and, especially, of the first leaf; at a concentration of 0.4 M growth of the overground organs was stimulated. The results are discussed with respect to the possible ohanges in photoperiodic sensitivity brought about by the rate of initial growth.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allsopp, A.: XXI. Investigations onMarsilea 3. The effect of various sugars on development and morphology. - Ann. Bot. N.S.17: 447–463, 1953.
Alisopp, A.: The significance for development of water supply, osmotic relations and nutrition. - In: Ruhland, W. (ed.): Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. Vol. XV/1. Pp. 504–552. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1965.
Ballard, L. A. T., Wildman, G.: Induction of mitosis in excised and attached dormant buds of sunflower (Helianthus annuus). - Aust. J. biol. Sci.17: 36–43, 1964.
Cumming, B. G.:Chenopodium rubrum L. and related species. - In: The Induction of Flowering. Pp. 156–185. Macmillan of Australia, South Melbourne, Victoria 1969.
Nitsch, J. P.: Phytohormones et genèse des bourgeons végétatifs et floraux. - In: Les Phyto- hormones et l’Organogenèse. Pp. 265–299. Institut de Botanique, Service de physiologic végétale, Liège 1966.
Oota, Y.: A possible mechanism for sugar inhibition of duckweed. - Plant Cell Physiol.13: 195 to 199, 1972.
Seidlová, F.: Growth correlations and RNA synthesis in different parts of the shoot apical meristem ofChenopodium rubrum L. induced to flowering. - Biol. Plant.18: 19–25, 1976.
Teltscherová, L., Opatrná, J., Pleskotová, D.: Investigation of the endogenous rhythm of flowering inChenopodium rubrum L. - Biol. Plant.16: 341–347, 1974.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Teltscherová, L., Pleskotová, D. Effect of different sugars on flowering ofChenopodium rubrum L. in dependence on the conditions of germination and initial growth. Biol Plant 18, 221–226 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02922810
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02922810