Advertisement

Phloem pp 17-27 | Cite as

Transmission Electron Microscopy of the Phloem with Minimal Artifacts

  • Pascal Hunziker
  • Alexander SchulzEmail author
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 2014)

Abstract

It is a universal feature of seed plants that their phloem consists of a continuous sieve-tube system throughout the plant that is highly pressurized by its sugar contents. Cellular continuity and the pressure flow, osmotically generated in the source leaves, allow the assimilates to reach all sinks organs. However, both phloem features, the cellular continuity and the high pressure, are challenges when fixing the phloem for transmission electron microscopy. With very few exceptions, the tissue preparation necessary for the fixation evokes rapid wound responses that eventually result in artifacts.

This chapter describes the steps necessary to minimize development of artifacts in the phloem and includes preparation of fixatives, a dissection procedure that optimizes penetration of the fixatives and application to axial and lateral plant organs. Moreover, as alternative to the established fixation of fresh hand sections, we suggest a xylem-assisted perfusion fixation method for herbaceous plants. After the initial fixation, the subsequent dehydration, embedding, and ultrathin sectioning of the material follow routine procedures, which are briefly discussed, as is the orientation of samples for obtaining transverse and longitudinal phloem sections.

Key words

Aldehyde fixatives Companion cell Phloem fixation Perfusion fixation Pressure release Sieve element Transmission electron microscopy Wound response 

References

  1. 1.
    Stanfield RC, Hacke UG, Laur J (2017) Are phloem sieve tubes leaky conduits supported by numerous aquaporins? Am J Bot 104(5):719–732.  https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1600422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jensen KH, Liesche J, Bohr T, Schulz A (2012) Universality of phloem transport in seed plants. Plant Cell Environ 35(6):1065–1076.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2011.02472.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schulz A (2015) Diffusion or bulk flow: how plasmodesmata facilitate pre-phloem transport of assimilates. J Plant Res 128(1):49–61.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-014-0676-5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rockwell FE, Gersony JT, Holbrook NM (2018) Where does Winch flow begin? Sucrose transport in the pre-phloem path. Curr Opin Plant Biol 43:101–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2018.04.007CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ham B-K, Lucas WJ (2014) The angiosperm phloem sieve tube system: a role in mediating traits important to modern agriculture. J Exp Bot 65(7):1799–1816.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ert417CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Froelich DR, Mullendore DL, Jensen KH, Ross-Elliott TJ, Anstead JA, Thompson GA, Pélissier HC, Knoblauch M (2011) Phloem ultrastructure and pressure flow: sieve-element-occlusion-related agglomerations do not affect translocation. Plant Cell 23(12):4428–4445.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.111.093179CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karahara I, Kang B-H (2014) High-pressure freezing and low-temperature processing of plant tissue samples for electron microscopy. In: Žárský V, Cvrčková F (eds) Plant cell morphogenesis: methods and protocols. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, pp 147–157.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-643-6_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karnovsky MJ (1965) A formaldehyde-glutaraldehyde fixative of high osmolality for use in electron microscopy. J Cell Biol 27(2):137A–138AGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reynolds ES (1963) Use of lead citrate at high Ph as an electron-opaque stain in electron microscopy. J Cell Biol 17(1):208–212.  https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.17.1.208CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Behnke HD (1995) Sieve-element characters of the proteaceae and elaeagnaceae: nuclear crystals, phloem proteins and sieve-element plastids. Botanica Acta 108(6):514–524.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.1995.tb00529.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schulz A (2017) Long-distance trafficking: lost in transit or stopped at the gate? Plant Cell 29(3):426–430.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.16.00895CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schulz A, Kühn C, Riesmeier JW, Frommer WR (1998) Ultrastructural effects in potato leaves due to antisense-inhibition of the sucrose transporter indicate an apoplasmic mode of phloem loading. Planta 206(4):533–543.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s004250050430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schulz A (1992) Living sieve cells of conifers as visualized by confocal, laser-scanning fluorescence microscopy. Protoplasma 166(3–4):153–164.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01322778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bell K, Mitchell S, Paultre D, Posch M, Oparka K (2013) Correlative imaging of fluorescent proteins in resin-embedded plant material. Plant Physiol 161(4):1595–1603.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.112.212365CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karnovsky MJ (1965) Ultrastructural cytochemistry of cholinesterase activity in cardiac muscle by means of a copper ferrocyanide precipitating method. J Histochem Cytochem 13(1):6Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hobro AJ, Smith NI (2017) An evaluation of fixation methods: spatial and compositional cellular changes observed by Raman imaging. Vib Spectrosc 91:31–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vibspec.2016.10.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant and Environmental SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksbergDenmark

Personalised recommendations