Back

Three-dimensional study of spur morphogenesis in the flower of Staphisagria picta (Ranunculaceae) - from cellular level to organ scale

Delpeuch, P.; Nadot, S.; Belcram, K.; Plumerault, A.; Damerval, C.; Jabbour, F.

2023-07-22 developmental biology
10.1101/2023.07.20.549858 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Floral spurs are invaginations borne by perianth organs (petals and/or sepals) that have evolved repeatedly in various angiosperm clades. They typically store nectar and can limit the access of pollinators to this reward, resulting in pollination specialization that can lead to speciation in both pollinator and plant lineages. Despite the ecological and evolutionary importance of nectar spurs, the cellular mechanisms involved during spur development have only been described in detail in a handful of species, primarily with respect to epidermal cells. These studies show that the mechanisms involved are taxon-specific. Using confocal microscopy and automated 3D image analysis, we studied spur morphogenesis in Staphisagria picta (Ranunculaceae) and showed that the process is marked by an early phase of dominant cell proliferation, followed by a phase of anisotropic (directional) cell expansion. The comparison with Aquilegia, another taxon of Ranunculaceae with spurred petals, revealed that the convergence in form between the spurs of both taxa is obtained by partially similar developmental processes. The analytical pipeline designed here is an efficient method to visualize in 3D each cell of a developing organ, paving the way for future comparative studies of organ morphogenesis in multicellular eukaryotes. HighlightA new method of 3D analysis of plant tissues at the cellular level revealed that spur morphogenesis in Staphisagria picta is marked by an early phase of dominant cell proliferation, followed by a phase of anisotropic cell expansion. Floral spur development is analysed for the first time quantitatively, taking into account all tissues composing the organ, namely epidermis and parenchyma.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.