1. Plant Biology
Download icon

Testing the Münch hypothesis of long distance phloem transport in plants

  1. Michael Knoblauch  Is a corresponding author
  2. Jan Knoblauch
  3. Daniel L Mullendore
  4. Jessica A Savage
  5. Benjamin A Babst
  6. Sierra D Beecher
  7. Adam C Dodgen
  8. Kaare H Jensen
  9. Noel Michele Holbrook
  1. Washington State University, United States
  2. Harvard University, United States
  3. University of Arkansas at Monticello, United States
  4. Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Research Article
  • Cited 70
  • Views 6,719
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e15341 doi: 10.7554/eLife.15341

Abstract

Long distance transport in plants occurs in sieve tubes of the phloem. The pressure flow hypothesis introduced by Ernst Münch in 1930 describes a mechanism of osmotically generated pressure differentials that are supposed to drive the movement of sugars and other solutes in the phloem, but this hypothesis has long faced major challenges. The key issue is whether the conductance of sieve tubes, including sieve plate pores, is sufficient to allow pressure flow. We show that with increasing distance between source and sink, sieve tube conductivity and turgor increases dramatically in Ipomoea nil. Our results provide strong support for the Münch hypothesis, while providing new tools for the investigation of one of the least understood plant tissues.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michael Knoblauch

    School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, United States
    For correspondence
    knoblauch@wsu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jan Knoblauch

    School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Daniel L Mullendore

    School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jessica A Savage

    Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Benjamin A Babst

    School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Arkansas at Monticello, Monticello, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Sierra D Beecher

    School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Adam C Dodgen

    School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Kaare H Jensen

    Department of Physics, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Noel Michele Holbrook

    Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Christian S Hardtke, University of Lausanne, Switzerland

Publication history

  1. Received: February 18, 2016
  2. Accepted: June 1, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 2, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 15, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Knoblauch et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,719
    Page views
  • 1,336
    Downloads
  • 70
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    Yan Gong et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Asymmetric and self-renewing divisions build and pattern tissues. In the Arabidopsis stomatal lineage, asymmetric cell divisions, guided by polarly localized cortical proteins, generate most cells on the leaf surface. Systemic and environmental signals modify tissue development, but the mechanisms by which plants incorporate such cues to regulate asymmetric divisions are elusive. In a screen for modulators of cell polarity, we identified CONSTITUTIVE TRIPLE RESPONSE1, a negative regulator of ethylene signaling. We subsequently revealed antagonistic impacts of ethylene and glucose signaling on the self-renewing capacity of stomatal lineage stem cells. Quantitative analysis of cell polarity and fate dynamics showed that developmental information may be encoded in both the spatial and temporal asymmetries of polarity proteins. These results provide a framework for a mechanistic understanding of how nutritional status and environmental factors tune stem-cell behavior in the stomatal lineage, ultimately enabling flexibility in leaf size and cell-type composition.

    1. Plant Biology
    Philipp Schwenk et al.
    Research Article

    Phytochromes are photoreceptors regulating growth and development in plants. Using the model plant Arabidopsis, we identified a novel signalling pathway downstream of the far-red light-sensing phytochrome, phyA, that depends on the highly conserved CCR4-NOT complex. CCR4-NOT is integral to RNA metabolism in yeast and animals, but its function in plants is largely unknown. NOT9B, an Arabidopsis homologue of human CNOT9, is a component of the CCR4-NOT complex, and acts as negative regulator of phyA-specific light signalling when bound to NOT1, the scaffold protein of the complex. Light-activated phyA interacts with and displaces NOT9B from NOT1, suggesting a potential mechanism for light signalling through CCR4-NOT. ARGONAUTE 1 and proteins involved in splicing associate with NOT9B and we show that NOT9B is required for specific phyA-dependent alternative splicing events. Furthermore, association with nuclear localised ARGONAUTE 1 raises the possibility that NOT9B and CCR4-NOT are involved in phyA-modulated gene expression.