Skip Navigation



AOBPreview published online on September 19, 2003
Annals of Botany, doi:10.1093/aob/mcg194
© 2003 by Annals of Botany Company
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
92/5/689    most recent
mcg194v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ADAMS, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by JACKSON, S. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by ADAMS, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by JACKSON, S. D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by ADAMS, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by JACKSON, S. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Submitted on April 30, 2003
Revised on June 2, 2003
Accepted on July 28, 2003

Using Flowering Times and Leaf Numbers to Model the Phases of Photoperiod Sensitivity in Antirrhinum majus L

S. R. ADAMS1*, M. MUNIR2, V. M. VALDéS1, F. A. LANGTON1, and S. D. JACKSON1

Affiliation of the authors: 1 Horticulture Research International, Wellesbourne, Warwick CV35 9EF, UK and; 2 School of Plant Sciences, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AS, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: steven.adams{at}hri.ac.uk.

A model has been developed that can be used to determine the phases of sensitivity to photoperiod for seedlings subjected to reciprocal transfers at regular intervals between long (LD) and short day (SD) conditions. The novel feature of this approach is that it enables the simultaneous analysis of the time to flower and number of leaves below the inflorescence. A range of antirrhinum cultivars were grown, all of which were shown to be quantitative long-day plants. Seedlings were effectively insensitive to photoperiod when very young (juvenile). However, after the end of the juvenile phase, SD delayed flowering and increased the number of leaves below the inflorescence. Plants transferred from LD to SD showed a sudden hastening of flowering and a decrease in leaf number once sufficient LD had been received for flower commitment. Photoperiod had little effect on the rate of flower development. The analysis clearly identified major cultivar differences in the length of the juvenile phase and the photoperiod-sensitive inductive phase in both LD and SD.
Key words: Antirrhinum majus, snapdragon, photoperiod, reciprocal transfer, flowering, leaf number, model, juvenility.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.