戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 ves perturbs these gradients, hence altering leaf shape.
2 ent in plants is characterized by changes in leaf shape.
3 oot branching, mutations at both loci affect leaf shape.
4 ms of flowering time, overall plant size and leaf shape.
5 ut leaf development without altering overall leaf shape.
6 flowering time, 11 for leaf color, and 5 for leaf shape.
7 nce when using more quantitative measures of leaf shape.
8 omplete reduction of internodes and abnormal leaf shape.
9 opmental pathways responsible for patterning leaf shape.
10 thermore, SRM1 impacts vegetative growth and leaf shape.
11 iation study to explore the genetic basis of leaf shape.
12 eformation when investigating the control of leaf shape.
13 ransport, consequently leading to changes in leaf shape.
14 ect patterns in the directions of changes in leaf shape.
15 ction in leaf size and severe alterations of leaf shape.
16 istributed unevenly and contributes to final leaf shape.
17 g aspects of plant diversity is variation in leaf shape.
18 ing, and the establishment of complex mature leaf shapes.
19 cellular growth is translated into different leaf shapes.
20                                              Leaf shape, a spectacularly diverse plant trait, varies
21 hat was originally isolated based on altered leaf shape, activity of the auxin-responsive reporters D
22                           The classical okra leaf shape allele has a 133-bp tandem duplication in the
23                                We identified leaf shape (allometry) as a genetic module independent o
24                                              Leaf shape and architecture vary greatly throughout the
25 ox gene expression is not repressed, overall leaf shape and cellular differentiation within the leaf
26                          However, changes in leaf shape and complexity in response to shade remain in
27  with fewer flowers, and dramatic changes in leaf shape and complexity.
28 odel, together with global information about leaf shape and existing venation.
29 2) is required for the development of normal leaf shape and for the repression of KNOX genes in the l
30  such as reduced organ size, altered rosette leaf shape and increased number of coflorescences, durin
31  understand the evolution and development of leaf shape and its response to environmental pressures.
32 heory for 30 species of Viburnum, diverse in leaf shape and photosynthetic anatomy, grown in a common
33 y, we determined leaf N and P stoichiometry, leaf shape and plant size in three Quercus acutissima co
34 ichiometry was significantly correlated with leaf shape and plant size, suggesting that leaf N and P
35 e maize mutant narrow sheath (ns) displays a leaf shape and plant stature phenotype that suggests the
36        Heteroblasty refers to the changes in leaf shape and size (allometry) along stems.
37 in heteroblasty have co-evolved with overall leaf shape and size in Antirrhinum because these charact
38 s with reduced levels of DEK1 and changes in leaf shape and size in plants constitutively overexpress
39                       Floral composition and leaf shape and size suggest that climate warmed by appro
40 ction of LG1 and WAB1 reveals a link between leaf shape and tassel architecture, and suggests the lig
41 uding localized fluorescent lesions, altered leaf shape and texture, reduced signification in xylem,
42 auline leaf identity, affecting both cauline leaf shape and the number of leaves on secondary inflore
43                                              Leaf shape and the total number of abaxial trichomes are
44  shaped leaves: Arabidopsis thaliana (simple leaf shape) and Cardamine hirsuta (complex shape with le
45 ts in plants with larger leaves (but altered leaf shape) and early flowering relative to plants expre
46 tal phenotypes, including dwarfism, aberrant leaf shape, and delayed flowering.
47 nderstanding the potential adaptive value of leaf shape, and how to molecularly manipulate it, will p
48 ifferential effects on hypocotyl elongation, leaf shape, and petiole length, as well as on gene expre
49 pes between lines, including flowering time, leaf shape, and pollen viability.
50 lates apical cell function, leaf initiation, leaf shape, and shoot tropisms in moss gametophytes.
51 tion rates underlie part of the diversity of leaf shape, and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) leaves are
52 ment of two Passiflora species with distinct leaf shapes, and compared the phenotype of these to tran
53            Techniques to assess variation in leaf shape are often time-consuming, labour-intensive an
54            The effects of shade avoidance on leaf shape are subtle with respect to individual traits
55                                              Leaf shapes arise within a developmental context that co
56 ification of biological forms using crucifer leaf shape as an example.
57 ated grape (Vitis spp.) to determine whether leaf shapes attributable to genetics and development are
58  (margin cells) and restoration of wild-type leaf shape (but not leaf size).
59 meobox gene REDUCED COMPLEXITY (RCO) altered leaf shape by changing gene expression from the distal l
60 ined the role of genetics and environment on leaf shape by performing field studies in two geographic
61 y mediate the action of auxin in determining leaf shape by repressing outgrowth in areas of low auxin
62 opmental origins of shade-induced changes in leaf shape by swapping plants between light treatments.
63          We arrive at a model that shows how leaf shape can arise through feedback between early patt
64         We suggest that natural variation in leaf shape can be created with a rheostat-like mechanism
65                                      Because leaf shape can vary in many different ways, theoreticall
66 esults show that morphogenesis of complex 3D leaf shapes can be accounted for by similar mechanisms t
67 will improve the discernment of quantitative leaf shape characteristics, and the methods are ready to
68           Although motivated by a biological leaf shape data analysis, the proposed FunFor approach h
69 dicted BY for two commercial cultivars using leaf shape data as input.
70 embryo and emerging leaf symmetry anomalies, leaf shape defects, premature inflorescence development,
71 identified based on trichome, cotyledon, and leaf-shape defects.
72                                 We show that leaf shape depends on the interplay of two growth modes:
73          Many genes have been identified for leaf-shape determination, but the underlying nature of l
74 , we investigate this problem in the case of leaf shape differences between Arabidopsis thaliana, whi
75  C. hirsuta (ChCUC1) is a key determinant of leaf shape differences between the two species.
76 programs despite dramatic species-to-species leaf shape differences.
77 led with gene duplication and loss generated leaf shape diversity by modifying local growth patterns
78 ment, focusing on the morphogenetic basis of leaf shape diversity.
79 ), revealing that changes in timing underlie leaf shape diversity.
80            The results show that the overall leaf shape does not change notably during the developmen
81 ons demonstrate that the generation of maize leaf shape does not depend on the precise spatial contro
82 f phenotype would incorporate the changes in leaf shape during juvenile-to-adult phase transitions an
83 rounding environment, both the plasticity of leaf shape during the lifetime of a plant and the evolut
84                                              Leaf shape elaboration and organ separation are critical
85          Overlapping flaps at borders of oak leaf-shaped endothelial cells of initial lymphatics lack
86                     Mobula rays have evolved leaf-shaped filter structures to separate food particles
87                  The genetic independence of leaf shape from other leaf traits may therefore enable c
88 production was more important in determining leaf shape, given the constant cell size across the leaf
89                                              Leaf shape, highly distinct between S. aethnensis and S.
90 trate that regulated auxin gradients control leaf shape in a KNOX-independent fashion and that inappr
91 UNUSUAL FLORAL ORGANS also alters C. hirsuta leaf shape in an LFY-dependent manner.
92                                              Leaf shape in Arabidopsis is modulated by patterning eve
93  LEAF3 (SIL3) gene is a novel determinant of leaf shape in Cardamine hirsuta - a dissected-leaved rel
94 , we demonstrate that shade avoidance alters leaf shape in domesticated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)
95  of heteroblastic and ontogenetic effects on leaf shape in each group.
96 on for increased final leaf size and altered leaf shape in elevated [CO(2)].
97 , but not leaf length, demonstrating changed leaf shape in response to [CO(2)].
98 tly modulates auxin signaling in controlling leaf shape in response to local spatial gradients in app
99  is responsible for the natural variation in leaf shape in the Galapagean tomatoes.
100 a (l-D1), which is responsible for the major leaf shapes in cotton.
101 genesis results in a wide range of petal and leaf shapes in response to environmental cues, have insp
102 nvironment and how they interact to modulate leaf shape is a thorny evolutionary problem, and sophist
103                                              Leaf shape is associated with venation features that aff
104       In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), leaf shape is established during early development throu
105 cesses is essential during leaf development, leaf shape is highly diverse across the plant kingdom, i
106             A comprehensive understanding of leaf shape is important in many investigations in plant
107  developmental, and environmental effects on leaf shape is lacking.
108                                              Leaf shape is mutable, changing in ways modulated by bot
109                                              Leaf shape is spectacularly diverse.
110                     A classical view is that leaf shape is the result of local promotion of growth li
111                        We found that the oak leaf-shaped LECs showed a spectrum of VE-cadherin-based
112              We demonstrate that A. thaliana leaf shape likely derived from a more complex lobed ance
113 e majority of approaches in the quantitative leaf shape literature, this framework-level approach is
114  age-related growth reprogramming influences leaf shape modifications in simple- and complex-leaved,
115 ect one-pot synthesis of "tripartite" clover-leaf shaped nanoparticles which would be difficult to ac
116 lele that came to predominate and define the leaf shape of cultivated cotton.
117 sults indicate that subokra is the ancestral leaf shape of tetraploid cotton that gave rise to the ok
118 changes in fruit morphology or the impact of leaf shape on photosynthesis.
119 er, investigations into the genetic basis of leaf shape or its connections to phytochemical compositi
120 the lifetime of a plant and the evolution of leaf shape over geologic time are revealing with respect
121                                              Leaf shape played a unique role in cotton improvement, a
122 ships between leaf N and P stoichiometry and leaf shape ranged from |0.12| to |1.00|, while the slope
123 e margin as a key mediator in the control of leaf shape, separable from a general function of this gr
124 This extensive and multilevel examination of leaf shape shows an important role of genetics underlyin
125  within the leaf and a correlated control of leaf shape, size and symmetry.
126                                   Conversely leaf shape, specifically rounder leaves, had a strong po
127 id are crossed, leading to a chain of planar leaf-shaped structures of the flowing liquid.
128 e that local repression of growth influences leaf shape, suggesting that it could be part of the mech
129  with a novel ornithodiran bauplan including leaf-shaped teeth, a beak-like lower jaw, long, gracile
130 ate necks, laterally expanded pelves, small, leaf-shaped teeth, edentulous rostra and mandibular symp
131 ckling in the formation of three-dimensional leaf shapes, this review integrates the perspectives of
132        This study revealed the importance of leaf shape to fruit quality in tomato, with rounder leav
133         Our model allows a range of observed leaf shapes to be generated and predicts observed clone
134 etic underpinnings of this highly functional leaf shape trait is poor.
135                                              Leaf shape traits have long been a focus of many discipl
136 inforest shows strong heteroblasty affecting leaf shape, transitioning from juvenile simple leaves to
137                                  We examined leaf shape using a variety of morphometric analyses, and
138  Here, we performed a multilevel analysis of leaf shape using diverse accessions of sweet potato (Ipo
139 ver, comprehensive intraspecific analyses of leaf shape variation across variable environments is sur
140                     We showed that extensive leaf shape variation exists within I. batatas, and ident
141 ironmental interactive mechanisms regulating leaf shape variation have not yet been investigated in d
142 ility of LeafAnalyser we also calculated the leaf shape variation in 300 leaves from Arabidopsis thal
143 rovide a high-throughput method to calculate leaf shape variation that allows a large number of leave
144 e were able to summarise the major trends in leaf shape variation using a principal components (PC) a
145  factors are largely responsible for most of leaf shape variation, but that the environment is highly
146 iques to greatly simplify the measurement of leaf shape variation.
147 ange across local spatial gradients leads to leaf shape variation.
148                                 In addition, leaf shape varies among individuals, populations and spe
149                                              Leaf shape varies spectacularly among plants.
150                                We found that leaf shape was poorly correlated with abaxial trichome p
151                           The characteristic leaf shapes we see in all plants are in good part the ou
152 uantitative trait locus (QTL) for C. hirsuta leaf shape, we find that a different process, age-depend
153 merization of both RS2 and AS1 and modulates leaf shape when expressed independently of the Myb domai
154 el that describes the range and variation of leaf shape within standard wild-type lines, and illustra
155 lopment of the meristem, can produce diverse leaf shapes within a plant.
156 ts may therefore enable crop optimization in leaf shape without negative effects on traits such as si

 
Page Top