Plant Communication

8 Key excerpts on "Plant Communication"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Brilliant Green

  The Surprising History and Science of Plant Intelligence

  • Stefano Mancuso, Alessandra Viola, Joan Benham(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Island Press

    (Publisher)

  We human beings can’t direct a message from our foot to our hand or mouth: all signals, with few exceptions, must first be processed by the brain. Plants, however, can communicate not only from their roots to their crown and vice versa, but also from one root or leaf to another. Their intelligence is distributed! Having no central processing center means that in a plant, information needn’t always take the same pathway; instead, it can be transmitted quickly and efficiently right where it’s needed.

  Communication Between Plants

  Plant Language

  In our discussion of plants’ senses, we saw that they can communicate with each other by means of a real language, composed of thousands of chemical molecules which are released into the air or the water and contain various types of information (see chapter 3 ). Emitting these molecules is plants’ preferred means of communication, just as releasing articulated sounds is preferred by human beings. But we also communicate by means of gestures, facial expressions, bearing, and body language: a system of communication which, though differing from species to species, exists among many animals, especially the higher animals.

  And plants? They can communicate with each other, too, by touching (generally with their roots, but sometimes also with their aerial parts) or by positioning themselves in particular ways relative to their neighbors. This is what happens with competing plants during “escape from shade,” when they assume different positions relative to each other, vying to win the race to capture light (see chapter 3 ).

  Another example of “gestural” communication is “crown shyness,” so named by the French botanist Francis Hallé (b. 1938). This phenomenon, in which some trees tend to avoid touching each other’s crown even when growing very close to each other, is not seen in all species, however. Trees usually aren’t shy at all about intermingling their crowns. But some species of the families Fagaceae, Pinaceae, and Mirtaceae—to mention a few of the most common—are quite reserved and don’t appreciate such interweaving. Just go into a pine woods and look up. The trees manage never to let their crowns touch, but leave a bit of empty space between their own leaves and their neighbor’s, thus avoiding contact that we might assume would be unwelcome. Though why and how it happens isn’t clear, this phenomenon implies a type of signaling by which the crowns communicate their presence mutually and agree to a sort of territorial partitioning (in this case, of air and of light) so as not to disturb each other.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Plant Growth Responses for Smart Agriculture

  Prospects and Applications

  • T. Girija, Nandini K., Parvathi M S, T. Girija, Nandini K., Parvathi M S(Authors)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • CRC Press

    (Publisher)

  Signal transduction pathway involves three main steps namely perception, transduction and response. Perception means receiving the stimulus; this is by receptor molecules which are normally located on the cell membrane. When the stimulus binds with the receptor molecules, it circulates in the cell through the process of transduction. During transduction, signals will be amplified by generation of second messengers which carry them to the effector molecule. When the stimulus reaches the effector molecules, a corresponding biological effect is activated with the help of relay molecules. This is the third and final step and is known as “response”. It is initiated with an upregulation or down regulation of a corresponding gene expression (Taiz and Zeiger, 2010).

  Types of signals generated by plants

  There are different forms of signals with which messages are conveyed from cell to cell in plants. Different plant signalling systems are shown in figure 1 .

  Fig. 1 : Plant signaling systems: Types and interactions. (Adapted from Huber and Bauerle, 2016)

  Apart from electrical signals, there are hydraulic and chemical signals in plants for inter cellular communication in plants.

  1. Electrical signals propagate as action potential, system potential and slow wave potential.
  2. Hydraulic signals include changes in turgor pressure, pressure waves and mass flow of ions.
  3. Chemical signals include reactive oxygen species, cation and anion channel signalling, volatile chemicals, hormones etc.

  All the three signalling pathways are interwoven for effective communication between plants cells (Huber and Bauerle, 2016 ). Interaction between the different signalling pathways contribute to changes in gene expression pattern at molecular level and result in biological effects.

  Systemic signalling

  Systemic signalling in plants occurs in response to a wide range of stimuli. When plants are exposed to different stresses in a locality, they perceive many stimuli which then elicits a wider adaptive response in plants. Once the signals are perceived by plants, it triggers a systemic transmission of information. This transmission may be carried out with a range of factors. These factors can be Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), small molecules, hormones, RNAs, proteins, reactive oxygen species (ROS), Nitrous Oxide, Ca2+ or even hydraulic or electrical signals (

  Choi et al., 2016

  ). Such signalling mechanisms in plants has been observed to impart Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR) and Systemic Acquired Acclimation (SAA) in plants. SAR is acquired by plants by exposure to biotic stress whereas SAA results from exposure to abiotic stress (

  Gilroy et al.,

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Plant Cell Biology

  • William V Dashek, Marcia Harrison(Authors)
  • 2010(Publication Date)
  • CRC Press

    (Publisher)

  CHAPTER 14 Plant Hormones and Signal Transduction Marcia Harrison PLANT SIGNALS A signal is denned as a chemical or environ- mental change that induces a cellular response. As sessile organisms, plants have developed a broad series of responses to numerous signals from the environment, symbiotic partners, and pathogen attack, in addition to internal signaling that controls growth and development Environmental signals range from changes in temperature, water availability, and light (daylength, unidirectional light, or light wavelength), to salt or metal exposure, changes in orienta- tion to gravity, and wind or touch. Chemical signals produced by the plant coordinate developmental and growth changes between tissues, between cells, and between subcellular compartments. Major plant signaling compounds include internally derived compounds such as hormones, polypeptides, and sugar, as well as factors associated with cell-to-cell signaling such as those involved in responses to pathogens. Plants Respond to Diversity of External Signals Plants respond to environmental signals through coordinated growth changes, resulting in a distinct response for each par- ticular signal (Table 14.1 and Fig. 14.1). light, heat, cold, and drought stresses initiate numerous changes that may allow a plant to acclimate to changing environment. Environmental signals often act by altering conformation and activity of existing cellu- lar proteins as part of the response. The change in conformation then initiates a series of cellular reactions. For example, a sudden elevation in temperature causes release of heat-shock factors from the cellu- lar proteins to which they are otherwise bound. The released factors act as transcrip- tion activators that bind to regulatory regions of heat-shock protein genes, induc- ing transcription of those genes (Taiz and Zeiger, 2002).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The Rhizosphere

  Biochemistry and Organic Substances at the Soil-Plant Interface, Second Edition

  • Roberto Pinton, Zeno Varanini, Paolo Nannipieri, Roberto Pinton, Zeno Varanini, Paolo Nannipieri(Authors)
  • 2007(Publication Date)
  • CRC Press

    (Publisher)

  In this chapter, we describe recent research on chemical-mediated communication in the rhizosphere, including both communication between plants and communication between plants and soil microbes. We begin with a brief review of the presence and behavior of chemical signals in the rhizosphere. Then, we discuss recent discoveries on the biology, chemistry, and mode of action of chemical signals that mediate negative interactions in the rhizosphere, first between plants and then between plants and soil microbes (Figure 11.1). Negative communication between plants includes phytotoxins with interspecific effects (allamones), phytotoxins with intraspecific effects (autotoxins and autoinhibitors), and chemical signals involved in parasitic plant–host interactions (allamones and kairomones). Negative communication between plants and soil microbes includes plant defense compounds (allamones), pathogenic virulence factors (allamones), and pathogenic compounds that elicit plant defenses (kairomones). In addition, we discuss new research on chemical signals that mediate positive interactions between plants and between plants and soil microbes (Figure 11.1). Positive communication between plants includes warning signals that induce plant defenses (kairomones and synomones) and signals involved in root growth into the soil matrix (kairomones, synomones, and autoinhibitors). Positive communication between plants and soil microbes includes chemical signals that mediate mutualistic associations between plant hosts and extracellular plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (ePGPR), intracellular nitrogen-fixing bacteria, and mycorrhizal fungi (synomones). Chemical Signals in the Rhizosphere: Root–Root and Root–Microbe Communication 299 B. C HEMICAL S IGNALS IN THE R HIZOSPHERE Plant roots contribute an estimated 5 to 21% of photosynthetically fixed carbon to the rhizosphere [3].

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The Computerized Greenhouse

  Automatic Control Application in Plant Production

  • Bozzano G Luisa(Author)
  • 2012(Publication Date)
  • Academic Press

    (Publisher)

  SECTION 4 Relating Plant Sciences This page intentionally left blank Chapter 11 ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNALS, RECEPTORS, PHYSIOLOGICAL AND GENETIC REGULATION IN PLANTS Aubrey W. Naylor Department of Botany Duke University Durham, North Carolina I. INTRODUCTION The development of organized form and behavior in living things presents many inspiring intellectual, philosophical and experimental challenges. How this is achieved in the simplest to the most complex life form is a many faceted question that until recently has been out of reach of experimental explanation. Advances in methodologies in physics, chemistry and biology have at last reached the point where theories and hypotheses can be rationally formulated, tested, recast and refined. There are still many, many undiscovered pieces to be identified in this jig-saw puzzle, but, at last, progress toward understanding is on an ever steepening incline. All organisms are the vectorial resultant of the interplay of their genetics and their internal and external environment. In the achievement of growth and form there is a bewildering array of control points. These are ever present at the environmental, genetic and biochemical levels. Without sensory molecules and systems, basic to directed responses, we could not have distinctly different forms and functions among plants and animals - only amorphous protoplasm. There could be no coordinated massing of functions we Copyright © 1993 by Academic Press, Inc. The Computerized Greenhouse 2 4 3 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. 244 A. W. Naylor casually associate with cell walls, membranes, cytoskeleton, nucleus, endoplasmic reticulum, chloroplasts, peroxysomes, mitochondria, chloroplasts, golgi apparatus and vacuoles. Signals for the production of all of these cell components must be highly coordinated if the cell is to survive in nature.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Abiotic Stress Response in Plants

  Physiological, Biochemical and Genetic Perspectives

  • Arun Shanker, B. Venkateswarlu, Arun Shanker, B. Venkateswarlu(Authors)
  • 2011(Publication Date)
  • IntechOpen

    (Publisher)

  Part 1 Signalling in Abiotic Stress 1 Abiotic and Biotic Stress Response Crosstalk in Plants Saúl Fraire-Velázquez 1 , Raúl Rodríguez-Guerra 2 and Lenin Sánchez-Calderón 1 1 Unidad de Biología Experimental, Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas Av. Revolución S/N, Guadalupe, Zacatecas 2 INIFAP Campo Experimental General Terán. Carretera Montemorelos-China km. 31 General Terán, Nuevo León 1,2 México 1. Introduction In the course of its evolution, plants have developed mechanisms to cope with and adapt to different types of abiotic and biotic stress imposed by the frequently adverse environment. The biology of a cell or cells in tissues is so complicated that with any given stimulus from the environment, multiple pathways of cellular signaling that have complex interactions or crosstalk are activated; these interactions probably evolved as mechanisms to enable the live systems to respond to stress with minimal and appropriate biological processes. The sensing of biotic and abiotic stress induces signaling cascades that activate ion channels, kinase cascades, production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), accumulation of hormones such as salicylic acid (SA), ethylene (ET), jasmonic acid (JA) and abscisic acid (ABA). These signals ultimately induce expression of specific sub-sets of defense genes that lead to the assembly of the overall defense reaction. In plants, defense response genes are transcriptionally activated by different forms of environmental stress or by pathogens. The induction of expression of defense genes in the response against certain pathogens is further dependent on temperature and humidity, suggesting the existence of a complex signaling network that allows the plant to recognize and protect itself against pathogens and environmental stress. A body of research has shown that calcium and reactive oxygen species are second messengers in the early response to abiotic and biotic stress.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Natural Products Isolation

  Separation Methods for Antimicrobials, Antivirals and Enzyme Inhibitors

  • G.H. Wagman, R. Cooper(Authors)
  • 1988(Publication Date)
  • Elsevier Science

    (Publisher)

  561 Chapter 14 CHEMICAL COMMUNICATION AND THE CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT CHRISTOPHER E. SMITH, JOHN D. ORR, and DAVID G. LYNN* Department of Chemistry, University of Chicago, 5735 S. Ellis Ave., Chicago, IL 60637 (USA) 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562 2. HOST RECOGNITION . . . I . . . . . . I I . . . . 563 2.1 Germination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 2.2 Haustoria Induction , . . . , , , . , . . . . . 568 2.2.1 Agalinis purpurea , . . . , . , . . . , . . 568 2.2.2 Striga asiatica . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 575 3. CELL CYCLE CONTROL . , . , , . . . , . . , . , . 579 4. TUMOROGENESIS . , . . . . . . . I , . . , , . , 583 5. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588 6. MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . 593 7. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . I 594 562 I never saw a moor, I never saw the sea; Yet know I how the heather looks, And what a wave must be. I never spoke with God, Nor visited in heaven; Yet certain am I of the spof As if the chart were given. Emily Dickinson, 1865 1. INTRODUCTION Man's ability to detect, register, and respond to events occurring in the environment orchestrates his behavior at virtually every moment. The detection of environmental signals, either as learned responses or as genetically encoded behavior is, in fact, used by all living organisms and in many cases defines their ultimate viability. The predominate signalling mechanism is chemical. Within this realm, natural products chemists have been able to characterize and classify many molecular mechanisms and uncover countless chemical strategies for adaptation and survival. The literature in this area is extensive and in this review we have chosen neither to highlight the many contributions nor to review the general classes of compounds that function as recognition signals. Rather we have taken a well defined and narrow focus and will discuss three recognition problems that illustrate the general area.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Plant-Microbial Interactions and Smart Agricultural Biotechnology

  • Swati Tyagi, Robin Kumar, Baljeet Saharan, Ashok Kumar Nadda, Swati Tyagi, Robin Kumar, Baljeet Saharan, Ashok Kumar Nadda(Authors)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • CRC Press

    (Publisher)

  Fagussylvatica, and underground soil microbiota under elevation gradients (Defossez et al. 2011). These notions on SGH are supported by the understanding of vascular plant interactions with other plants, insects, mycorrhizae, and microbes, such as fungi, and bacteria, in various environments. However, there are few studies that have been conducted otherwise.

  8.4.4 Plants Do Talk and Listen to Each Other

  Individual plants are known to display directed signaling responses within their systems to light and nutritional resources. Additionally, plants also emit various signals in response to insect herbivory that may attract various carnivores (Silvertown and Gordon 1989; Farmer 2001; Karban and Baldwin 2007; Dicke and van Loon 2000). The ability to emit volatile compounds bridges their interaction with other organisms, known as “plant talking behavior” in the molecular purview. Whether plants talk among themselves in their neighborhood about their damage relevant status has been a debatable theme of research and discussion among plant biologist communities with many believing that plants usually are neutral to receiving any such responses from different neighbors or those conspecific to them in their close vicinity (Rhoades 1983; Baldwin and Schultz 1983). However, plethora of evidence has been accumulating to vouch for such a signaling phenomenon among neighboring plants and has been realized by either launching i) a direct defense, rendering them tolerant to upcoming herbivore infestation or ii) an indirect defense by recruiting arthropod bodyguards. By these mechanisms, specific plants that are capable of receiving such calls from their neighbors have an advantage over those who are incapable of tapping into these calls (Dicke and van Loon 2000). This should be interpreted as facilitation and possibly interdependence in terms of the integrity of the plant community structure and its build up and reshaping – more in the circumstances of periodic invasion from unwanted guests such as insects, weeds, and parasitic plants at such communities. Notably, these notions have built the hypothesis that plants adaptively redirect responses to chemical signals emitted from those close by (Figure 8.4

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book