Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 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 Lumsden, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Furuya, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Lumsden, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Furuya, M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Lumsden, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Furuya, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Plant and Cell Physiology, 1986, Vol. 27, No. 8 1541-1551
© 1986

Article

Evidence for Two Actions of Light in the Photoperiodic Induction of Flowering in Pharbitis nil

Peter J. Lumsden and Masaki Furuya1

Division of Biological Regulation, National Institute for Basic Biology Okazaki, Aichi 444, Japan

Using one-day-old light-grown seedlings of Pharbitis nil we have shown that there are two distinct responses to light during the inductive dark period. The first is the classic night-break, which inhibits flowering at a specific stage of the circadian rhythm (assumed to be the basis of dark time measurement). The second action is to control the phase of this rhythm. The two responses were compared at the 6th and 8th hour of darkness. They differed in their dose responses, and by using very short exposures it was possible to achieve one response without the other. The response of the rhythm to light displayed characteristics of other circadian rhythms; the direction and sensitivity of the phase shift changed between the 6th and 8th h, the rhythm was reset by longer exposures to light, and with one critical light treatment at the appropriate phase, the rhythm was apparently abolished. These results offer direct support for an external coincidence model in the photoperiodic control of floral induction.

1Permanent address: Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Tokyo 113, Japan.

(Received July 4, 1986; Accepted September 18, 1986)
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Plant CellHome page
R. Hayama, B. Agashe, E. Luley, R. King, and G. Coupland
A Circadian Rhythm Set by Dusk Determines the Expression of FT Homologs and the Short-Day Photoperiodic Flowering Response in Pharbitis
PLANT CELL, October 1, 2007; 19(10): 2988 - 3000.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Plant CellHome page
R. Ishikawa, S. Tamaki, S. Yokoi, N. Inagaki, T. Shinomura, M. Takano, and K. Shimamoto
Suppression of the Floral Activator Hd3a Is the Principal Cause of the Night Break Effect in Rice
PLANT CELL, December 1, 2005; 17(12): 3326 - 3336.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genes Dev.Home page
T. Izawa, T. Oikawa, N. Sugiyama, T. Tanisaka, M. Yano, and K. Shimamoto
Phytochrome mediates the external light signal to repress FT orthologs in photoperiodic flowering of rice
Genes & Dev., August 1, 2002; 16(15): 2006 - 2020.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.