Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:13:23.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Effect of Auxin on Sprouting in Poison Ivy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. P. Sterrett
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Physiology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg
C. L. Foy
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Physiology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg
S. W. Bingham
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Physiology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg

Abstract

Experiments were conducted on poison ivy (Rhus radicans L.) to determine the effect of auxin on the formation of sprouts. Stump sprouting occurred where poison ivy propagules were decapitated. The influence of the shoot could be replaced by applying indoleacetic acid (hereinafter referred to as IAA) in lanolin paste to the cut surface of the stump. When the paste was removed after inhibiting stump sprouting for a month, sprouts formed within 35 days. This evidence supports the apical dominance theory of stump sprouting. When IAA-2-14C in lanolin was applied to the cut surface of the root stump, autoradiographs showed that 14C activity was concentrated where the majority of stump sprouts would develop, and chromatography of an extract indicated the presence of an auxin oxidation product of IAA. Dialyzed enzyme preparations from poison ivy stumps oxidized IAA in a Warburg apparatus which demonstrated that an IAA oxidizing system was present.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 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. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The Autoradiography of Plant Materials. Agr. Publ., Univ. California, Berkeley. 143 p.Google Scholar
2. Crooks, D. M. and Klingman, D. L. 1967. Poison Ivy, Poison Oak and Poison Sumac. U. S. Dep. of Agr. Farmers' Bull. No. 1972. 16 p.Google Scholar
3. Farmer, R. E. Jr. 1962. Aspen root sucker formation and apical dominance. Forest Sci. 8:403410.Google Scholar
4. Galston, A. W. and Hillman, W. S. 1961. The degradation of auxin. Encycl. Plant Physiol. 14:647670.Google Scholar
5. Hare, R. C. 1964. Indoleacetic acid oxidase. Bot. Rev. 30:129165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Layne, E. 1957. Spectrophotometric and turbidimetric methods for measuring proteins, p. 447454. In: Colowick, S. P. and Kaplan, N. O. [eds.] Methods in Enzymology, Vol. 3. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
7. Morgan, P. W. and Hall, W. C. 1963. Indoleacetic acid oxidizing enzyme and inhibitors from light-grown cotton. Plant Physiol. 38:365370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Skoog, F. and Thimann, K. V. 1934. Further experiments on the inhibition of the development of lateral buds by growth hormones. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 20:311334.Google Scholar
9. Sterrett, J. P. and Chappell, W. E. 1967. The effect of auxin on suckering in black locust. Weeds 15:323326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Sterrett, J. P., Foy, C. L., and Bingham, S. W. 1969. Regenerative capacity of vegetative plant parts of poison ivy. Proc. Northeastern Weed Contr. Conf. 23:417 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
11. Tang, Y. W. and Bonner, J. 1947. The enzymatic inactivation of indoleacetic acid. I. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 13:1125.Google Scholar
12. Thimann, K. V. 1934. Studies on the growth hormone in plants. VI. The distribution of the growth substance in plant tissues. J. Gen. Physiol. 18:2334.Google Scholar
13. Thimann, K. V. 1937. On the nature of inhibitions of auxin. Amer. J. Bot. 24:407412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Umbreit, W. W., Burris, R. H., and Stauffer, J. F. 1964. Manometric Techniques. Burgess Publishing Co., Minneapolis, Minn. 305 p.Google Scholar
15. Waygood, E. R., Oaks, A., and Maclachlan, G. A. 1956. The enzymically catalyzed oxidation of indoleacetic acid. Can. J. Bot. 34:905926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar