Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T18:05:28.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparative SEM Study of Red Rice and Several Commerical Rice (Oryza sativa) Varieties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

R. E. Hoagland  and
R. N. Paul
R. E. Hoagland
Affiliation:
South. Weed Sci. Lab., Sci. Ed. Admin., U.S. Dep. Agric., Stoneville, MS 38776
R. N. Paul
Affiliation:
South. Weed Sci. Lab., Sci. Ed. Admin., U.S. Dep. Agric., Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A comparative scanning electron microscopy (SEM) study was performed on the surfaces of seeds and coleoptiles of several conspecific rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties including the weed red rice and several cultivars: Mochi-Gommi and LA-110 (medium grained); Starbonnet, Labelle, and Bluebelle (long grained). Seed surfaces of red rice, LA-110 and Mochi-Gommi possessed trichomes that were more numerous at the seed apex than on other seed parts. Red rice also exhibited a large central awn extending from the seed apex. This awn had spines along its axis and numerous spines at its apical end. These characteristics were absent in the other varieties. No significant differences were noted in the seed-surface tubercles and in the quantity or structure of wax on the seed surface in all six samples. The coleoptiles of all samples had several similarities: the stomata were arranged in parallel rows on both the adaxial and abaxial surfaces, the epicuticular wax structure on both surfaces was rodlet, prickle hairs were found on the adaxial coleoptile surface (but absent on abaxial), spines were present on the edge of the apical end (older portion) and decreased in number toward the basal end (younger portion), and two types of papillae (based on size and shape) were present on both the adaxial and abaxial surfaces. Although there were varietal differences among developing coleoptiles on a macroscopic scale, significant morphological differences were not discernible at the SEM level.

Keywords

Scanning electron microscopyplant topographymorphologyanatomy
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 26 , Issue 6 , November 1978 , pp. 619 - 625
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Aranyi, C. and Hawrylewicz, E. J. 1969. Application of scanning electron microscopy to cereal specimens. Cereal Sci. Today 14:230.Google Scholar
2. Ball, P. W. and Heywood, V. H. 1962. The taxonomic separation of cytological races of Kohrauschia prolifera (L.). Kunth sensu lato. Watsonia 5:113–116.Google Scholar
3. Bayer, D. E. and Lumb, J. M. 1973. Penetration and translocation of herbicides. Pages 387–431 in Van Valkenburg, W. (ed.). Pesticide Formulations. Marcell Dekker, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
4. Beasley, C. A. 1975. Developmental morphology of cotton flowers and seed as seen with the scanning electron microscope. Am. J. Bot. 62:584–592.Google Scholar
5. Chuang, T. F. and Heckard, L. R. 1972. Seed coat morphology in Cordylanthus (Scrophulariaceae) and its taxonomic significance. Am. J. Bot. 59:258–265.Google Scholar
6. Davis, D. G., Meola, S. M., and Mullins, J. S. 1976. Extraneous materials on plant surfaces–an SEM study. Weed Sci. 24:341–347.Google Scholar
7. Duke, J. A. 1961. Preliminary revision of the genus Drymaria . Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 48:173–268.Google Scholar
8. Echlin, P. 1968. The use of the scanning reflection electron microscope in the study of plant and microbial material. J. R. Microsc. Soc. 88:407–418.Google Scholar
9. Eglinton, G., Gonzalez, A. G., Hamilton, R. J., and Raphael, R. A. 1962. Hydrocarbon constituents of the wax coatings of plant leaves: a taxonomic survey. Phytochemistry 1:89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Eglinton, G. and Hamilton, R. J. 1967. Leaf epicuticular waxes. Science 156:1322–1335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Faust, M. and Shear, C. B. 1972. Fine structure of the fruit surface of three apple cultivars. Hort. Sci. 97:351–355.Google Scholar
12. Fogg, G. E. 1948. Adhesion of water to external surfaces of leaves. Discuss. Faraday Soc. no. 3:162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Furmidge, C. G. L. 1968. Use of hydrocarbon oils in agricultural sprays. J. Proc. Inst. Agric. Eng. 23:173–182.Google Scholar
14. Gentner, W. A. 1962. The inhibitory influence of ethyl N,N-di-n-propylthiol carbamate (EPTC) on wax formation in cabbage. George Washington Univ. Bull. 62:38–39.Google Scholar
15. Gentner, W. A. 1966. The influence of EPTC on external foliage wax deposition. Weeds 14:27–31.Google Scholar
16. Harper, J. L., Lovell, P. H., and Moore, K. G. 1970. The shapes and sizes of seeds. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1:327–356.Google Scholar
17. Herbin, G. A. and Robins, P. A. 1968. Studies on plant cuticular waxes. I. The chemotaxonomy of alkanes and alkenes of the genus Aloe (Liliaceae). Phytochemistry 7:239–255.Google Scholar
18. Heslop-Harrison, Y. and Heslop-Harrison, J. 1969. Scanning electron microscopy of leaf surfaces. Proc. 2nd Annual Scanning Electron Microscope Symposium. O. Johari and I. Corvin, eds. IIT Research Institute 2:117–126.Google Scholar
19. Heywood, V. H. 1969. Scanning electron microscopy in the study of plant materials. Micron 1:1–14.Google Scholar
20. Heywood, V. H. 1969. Scanning electron microscopy and micro-characters in the fruits of the Umbelliferae-Caucalideae. Proc. Linn. Soc. London 179:287–289.Google Scholar
21. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. T. 1959. California Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. 347, 32 pp.Google Scholar
22. Holloway, P. J. 1969. The effects of superficial wax on leaf wettability. Ann. Appl. Biol. 63:145–153.Google Scholar
23. Hull, H. M. 1964. Leaf structure as related to penetration of organic substances. Ann. Symp. Am. Soc. Plant Physiol., S. Sec. 7:45–93.Google Scholar
24. Juniper, B. E. 1957. The effect of pre-emergent treatment of peas with trichloroacetic acid on the submicroscopic structure of the leaf surface. New Phytol. 58:1–5.Google Scholar
25. Juniper, B. E. and Bradley, D. E. 1958. The carbon replica technique in the study of the ultrastructure of leaf surfaces. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 21:16–27.Google Scholar
26. McEwen, T. J., Dronzek, B. L., and Bushuk, W. 1974. A scanning electron microscope study of Fababean seed. Cereal Chem. 51:750–757.Google Scholar
27. Maeda, E. 1972. Surface structure of unhulled rice observed by scanning electron microscopy. Proc. Coop. Sci. Soc. Jap. 41:459–471.Google Scholar
28. Mann, J. D., and Pu, M. 1968. Inhibition of lipid synthesis by certain herbicides. Weed Sci. 16:197–198.Google Scholar
29. Martin, J. T., and Juniper, B. E. 1970. The Cuticles of Plants. Edward Arnold, London. 347 pp.Google Scholar
30. Metcalf, C. R. 1960. Anatomy of the Monocotyledons. I. Gramineae. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 731 pp.Google Scholar
31. Mueller, L. E., Carr, P. H., and Loomis, W. H. 1954. The submicroscopic structure of plant surfaces. Am. J. Bot. 41:593–600.Google Scholar
32. Parker, C. and Dean, M. L. 1976. Control of wild rice in rice. Pestic. Sci. 7:403–416.Google Scholar
33. Pomeranz, Y. and Sachs, I. B. 1972. Determining the structure of the barley kernel by scanning electron microscopy. Cereal Chem. 49:1–4.Google Scholar
34. Pomeranz, Y. and Sachs, I. B. 1972. Scanning electron microscopy of the oat kernel. Cereal Chem. 49:20–22.Google Scholar
35. Pomeranz, Y. and Sachs, I. B. 1972. Scanning electron microscopy of the buckwheat kernel. Cereal Chem. 49:23–25.Google Scholar
36. Schuyler, A. E. 1971. Scanning electron microscopy of achene epidermis in species of Scirpus (Cyperaceae) and related genera. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 123:29–52.Google Scholar
37. Still, G. G., Davis, D. G., and Zander, G. L. 1970. Plant epicuticular lipids: alteration by herbicidal carbamates. Plant Physiol. 46:307–314.Google Scholar
38. Tomb, A. S. 1974. SEM studies of small seeds. Proc. 7th Annual Scanning Electron Microscope Symposium. O. Johari and I. Corvin, eds. IIT Research Institute 7:375–380.Google Scholar
39. Whiffin, T. and Tomb, A. S. 1972. The systematic significance of seed morphology in the Neotropical capsular-fruited Melastomataceae. Am. J. Bot. 59:411–422.Google Scholar
40. Wilson, R. C. 1975. Abronia: III. Pericarp and seed coat anatomy and its ecological implications for nine species of Abronia . Aliso 8:289–299.Google Scholar
41. Wolf, W. J. and Baker, F. L. 1972. Scanning electron microscopy of soybeans. Cereal Sci. Today 17:124–130.Google Scholar