Parasitic plants are plants that connect with a haustorium to the vasculature of another, host, plant from which they absorb water, assimilates, and nutrients. Because of this parasitic lifestyle, parasitic plants need to coordinate their lifecycle with that of their host. Parasitic plants have evolved a number of host detection/host response mechanisms of which the germination in response to chemical host signals in one of the major families of parasitic plants, the Orobanchaceae, is a striking example. In this Update Review, we discuss these germination stimulants. We review the different compound classes that function as germination stimulants, how they are produced, and in which host plants. We discuss why they are reliable signals, how parasitic plants have evolved mechanisms that detect and respond to them, and whether they play a role in host specificity. The advances in the knowledge underlying this signaling relationship between host and parasitic plant have greatly improved our understanding of the evolution of plant parasitism and are facilitating the development of more effective control measures in cases where these parasitic plants have developed into weeds.

Maize ( Zea mays ) is a major staple crop in Africa, where its yield and the livelihood of millions are compromised by the parasitic witchweed Striga . Germination of Striga is induced by strigolactones exuded from maize roots into the rhizosphere. In a maize germplasm collection, we identified two strigolactones, zealactol and zealactonoic acid, which stimulate less Striga germination than the major maize strigolactone, zealactone. We then showed that a single cytochrome P450, ZmCYP706C37, catalyzes a series of oxidative steps in the maize-strigolactone biosynthetic pathway. Reduction in activity of this enzyme and two others involved in the pathway, ZmMAX1b and ZmCLAMT1, can change strigolactone composition and reduce Striga germination and infection. These results offer prospects for breeding Striga -resistant maize.

The maize (Zea mays) ear represents one of the most striking domestication phenotypes in any crop species, with the cob conferring an exceptional yield advantage over the ancestral form of teosinte. Remodeling of the grain-bearing surface required profound developmental changes. However, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear and can only be partly attributed to the known domestication gene Teosinte glume architecture 1 (Tga1). Here we show that a more complete conversion involves strigolactones (SLs), and that these are prominent players not only in the Tga1 phenotype, but also other domestication features of the ear and kernel. Genetic combinations of a teosinte tga1 allele with three SL-related mutants progressively enhanced ancestral morphologies. The SL mutants, in addition to modulating the tga1 phenotype, also reshaped kernel-bearing pedicels and cupules in a teosinte-like manner. Genetic and molecular evidence are consistent with SL regulation of TGA1, including direct interaction of TGA1 with components of the SL-signaling system shown here to mediate TGA1 availability by sequestration. Roles of the SL network extend to enhancing maize seed size and, importantly, coordinating increased kernel growth with remodeling of protective maternal tissues. Collectively, our data show that SLs have central roles in releasing kernels from restrictive maternal encasement and coordinating other factors that increase kernel size, physical support, and their exposure on the grain-bearing surface.

Summary Carotenoids are photoprotectant pigments and precursors of hormones such as strigolactones (SL). Carotenoids are produced in plastids from geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGPP), which is diverted to the carotenoid pathway by phytoene synthase (PSY). In tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), three genes encode plastid‐targeted GGPP synthases (SlG1 to SlG3) and three genes encode PSY isoforms (PSY1 to PSY3). Here, we investigated the function of SlG1 by generating loss‐of‐function lines and combining their metabolic and physiological phenotyping with gene co‐expression and co‐immunoprecipitation analyses. Leaves and fruits of slg1 lines showed a wild‐type phenotype in terms of carotenoid accumulation, photosynthesis, and development under normal growth conditions. In response to bacterial infection, however, slg1 leaves produced lower levels of defensive GGPP‐derived diterpenoids. In roots, SlG1 was co‐expressed with PSY3 and other genes involved in SL production, and slg1 lines grown under phosphate starvation exuded less SLs. However, slg1 plants did not display the branched shoot phenotype observed in other SL‐defective mutants. At the protein level, SlG1 physically interacted with the root‐specific PSY3 isoform but not with PSY1 and PSY2. Our results confirm specific roles for SlG1 in producing GGPP for defensive diterpenoids in leaves and carotenoid‐derived SLs (in combination with PSY3) in roots.