Advertisement

Proceedings: Plant Sciences

, Volume 95, Issue 3, pp 167–172 | Cite as

Stomatal response of chlorocholine chloride and indole-3-acetic acid inCommelina communis L.

  • C M Govil
Article
  • 90 Downloads

Abstract

The apertures of stomata on isolated epidermal peels from both the leaf surfaces ofCommelina communis were reduced in response to chlorocholine chloride as the concentrations increased from 0·01–10·0 mol m−3. When chlorocholine chloride was applied in combination with different concentrations of indoleacetic acid, stomatal closure occurred only when a high concentration of chlorocholine chloride was applied with a low concentration of indoleacetic acid, while low concentrations of chlorocholine chloride did not affect the stimulation of aperture caused by indoleacetic acid treatments. Chlorocholine chloride treatments caused depletion of K+ from the guard cells while indoleacetic acid resulted in accumulation of K+.

Keywords

Stomatal response chlorocholine chloride indoleacetic acid Commelina communis

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blein J P and Scalla R 1983 Action of herbicide lenacil on K+ permeability ofAcer cells: inInternational Symposium_— Membranes and compartmentation in Regulation of Plant Functions Toulouse, France (Abstract)Google Scholar
  2. El Damaty A H, Kuhn A M and Linser M 1964 A Preliminary investigation on increasing salt tolerance of plants by application of (2-chloro-ethyl)-trimethyl ammonium chloride;Agrochemica 8 129–138Google Scholar
  3. Halevy A H and Kessler B 1963 Increased tolerance of bean plants to soil drought by means of growth retarding substances;Nature (London) 197 310–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Larter E N, Sanhh M and Sosulski F W 1965 The morphological and physiological effects ofCcc on barley;Can. J. Plant Sci. 45 419–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Mansfield T A and Davies W J 1981in the Physiology of Biochemistry of Drought Resistance in Plants (eds L G Paleg and D Aspinall). (San Francisco Academic) 314–346Google Scholar
  6. Pemadasa M A 1979a Movements of abaxial and adaxial stomata;New Phytol. 82 69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pemadasa M A 1979b Stomatal responses to two herbicidal auxins;J. Exp. Bot. 30 267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Pemadasa M A 1981 Abaxial and adaxial stomatal behaviour and responses to fusicoccin on isolated epidermis ofCommelina communis;New Phytol. 89 373–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Raschke K 1975 Stomatal action;Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 26 309–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Scalla R S and Gauvrit C 1983 Action of Herbicides on Plant Cell Membrane; inInternational Symposium on Membranes and Compartmentation in Regulation of Plant Function. Toulouse, France (Abstract).Google Scholar
  11. Singh T N, Aspinall D and Paleg L G 1973 Stress metabolism IV The influence of proline accumulation of wheat (2-chloroethyl) trimethyl ammonium chloride (Ccc) &Ga 3 on grwoth and plants during water stress;Aust. J. Bot. Sci. 26 77–86Google Scholar
  12. Travis A J and Mansfield T A 1979a Stomatal responses of light and CO2 are dependent on KCl concentration;Plant Cell Environ. 2 319–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Travis A T and Mansfield T A 1979a Reversal of CO2 responses of stomata by fusicoccin;New Phytol. 83 607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Willmer C M and Mansfield T A 1970 Further observations on cation stimulated stomatal opening in isolated epidermis;New Phytol. 69 639–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 1952

Authors and Affiliations

  • C M Govil
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesLancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations