Quantitative Analysis of Shoot Development and Branching Patterns in Actinidia

Abstract

We developed a framework for the quantitative description of Actinidia vine architecture, classifying shoots into three types (short, medium and long) corresponding to the modes of node number distribution and the presence/ absence of neoformed nodes. Short and medium shoots were self-terminated and had only preformed nodes. Based on the cut-off point between their two modes of node number distribution, short shoots were defined as having nine or less nodes, and medium shoots as having more than nine nodes. Long shoots were non-terminated and had a number of neoformed nodes; the total number of nodes per shoot was up to 90. Branching patterns for each parent shoot type were represented by a succession of branching zones. Probabilities of different types of axillary production (latent bud, short, medium or long shoot) and the distributions of length for each branching zone were estimated from experimental data using hidden semi-Markov chain stochastic models. Branching was acrotonic on short and medium parent shoots, with most axillary shoots being located near the shoot tip. For long parent shoots, branching was mesotonic, with most long axillary shoots being located in the transition zone between the preformed and neoformed part of the parent shoot. Although the shoot classification is based on node number distribution there was a marked difference in average (per shoot) internode length between the shoot types, with mean values of 9, 27 and 47 mm for short, medium and long shoots, respectively. Bud and shoot development is discussed in terms of environmental controls.

Influence of intra‐shoot trophic competition on shoot development in two grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera)

“…By contrast, in most woody species [e.g. kiwi‐fruit ( Actinida deliciosa L.); Seleznyova et al 2002] and indeterminate herbaceous species [e.g. white clover ( Trifolium repens L.); Belaygue et al 1996; or pea ( Pisum sativum L.); Turc and Lecoeur 1997], plant leaf area depends primarily on leaf number rather than on individual leaf area.…”

A Conserved Potential Development Framework Applies to Shoots of Legume Species with Contrasting Morphogenetic Strategies

“…Given the important differences existing among dicots in terms of branching behavior and apical dominance (McSteen and Leyser, 2005), such regularity in the organogenetic process was not necessarily to be expected. Sylleptic shoot branching often occurs as a seemingly stochastic process, under the dependence of internal and environmental regulatory signals (Génard et al, 1994; Seleznyova et al, 2002; Rameau et al, 2015). Complex trophic and hormonal interplays can result in branches of the same order expressing very different characteristics depending on their position in the branching system (Lebon et al, 2004; Moreau et al, 2007), or presenting properties that change over time (e.g., increasing phyllochron, Barillot et al, 2012).…”

“…Shoot morphogenesis thus arises from the initiation of new phytomers by shoot meristems, from the expansive growth of the individual organs produced and from the differentiation of support tissues. Like many other dicotyledonous plants (Seleznyova et al, 2002; Lebon et al, 2006), forage legumes are characterized by shoots with complex and highly branched structures (e.g., white clover: Thomas, 1987; Gautier et al, 2000; Thomas et al, 2014; red clover: Taylor and Quesenberry, 1996). Considerable variability of shoot development is usually observed in dense stands (Gosse et al, 1988; Van Minnebruggen et al, 2015).…”

Predicting the vertical location of branches along Atlas cedar stem (Cedrus atlantica Manetti) in relation to annual shoot length

“…Recent studies in fruit trees [7,36] and forest trees [19] have shown that branching of shoots is often organized as a succession of homogeneous zones where composition properties, in terms of type of axillary production (i.e. branches), do not change substantially within zone but change markedly between zones.…”