ライフサイエンスコーパス: leaf shape

1 oot branching, mutations at both loci affect leaf shape.

2 ms of flowering time, overall plant size and leaf shape.

3 ut leaf development without altering overall leaf shape.

4 omplete reduction of internodes and abnormal leaf shape.

5 opmental pathways responsible for patterning leaf shape.

6 thermore, SRM1 impacts vegetative growth and leaf shape.

7 iation study to explore the genetic basis of leaf shape.

8 eformation when investigating the control of leaf shape.

9 ect patterns in the directions of changes in leaf shape.

10 ction in leaf size and severe alterations of leaf shape.

11 istributed unevenly and contributes to final leaf shape.

12 g aspects of plant diversity is variation in leaf shape.

13 ves perturbs these gradients, hence altering leaf shape.

14 ent in plants is characterized by changes in leaf shape.

15 The classical okra leaf shape allele has a 133-bp tandem duplication in the

16 We identified leaf shape (allometry) as a genetic module independent o

17 Leaf shape and architecture vary greatly throughout the

18 ox gene expression is not repressed, overall leaf shape and cellular differentiation within the leaf

19 However, changes in leaf shape and complexity in response to shade remain in

20 with fewer flowers, and dramatic changes in leaf shape and complexity.

21 odel, together with global information about leaf shape and existing venation.

22 2) is required for the development of normal leaf shape and for the repression of KNOX genes in the l

23 such as reduced organ size, altered rosette leaf shape and increased number of coflorescences, durin

24 understand the evolution and development of leaf shape and its response to environmental pressures.

25 heory for 30 species of Viburnum, diverse in leaf shape and photosynthetic anatomy, grown in a common

26 y, we determined leaf N and P stoichiometry, leaf shape and plant size in three Quercus acutissima co

27 ichiometry was significantly correlated with leaf shape and plant size, suggesting that leaf N and P

28 e maize mutant narrow sheath (ns) displays a leaf shape and plant stature phenotype that suggests the

29 Heteroblasty refers to the changes in leaf shape and size (allometry) along stems.

30 in heteroblasty have co-evolved with overall leaf shape and size in Antirrhinum because these charact

31 s with reduced levels of DEK1 and changes in leaf shape and size in plants constitutively overexpress

32 Floral composition and leaf shape and size suggest that climate warmed by appro

33 ction of LG1 and WAB1 reveals a link between leaf shape and tassel architecture, and suggests the lig

34 uding localized fluorescent lesions, altered leaf shape and texture, reduced signification in xylem,

35 Leaf shape and the total number of abaxial trichomes are

36 ts in plants with larger leaves (but altered leaf shape) and early flowering relative to plants expre

37 nderstanding the potential adaptive value of leaf shape, and how to molecularly manipulate it, will p

38 ifferential effects on hypocotyl elongation, leaf shape, and petiole length, as well as on gene expre

39 pes between lines, including flowering time, leaf shape, and pollen viability.

40 lates apical cell function, leaf initiation, leaf shape, and shoot tropisms in moss gametophytes.

41 tion rates underlie part of the diversity of leaf shape, and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) leaves are

42 Techniques to assess variation in leaf shape are often time-consuming, labour-intensive an

43 The effects of shade avoidance on leaf shape are subtle with respect to individual traits

44 Leaf shapes arise within a developmental context that co

45 ification of biological forms using crucifer leaf shape as an example.

46 ated grape (Vitis spp.) to determine whether leaf shapes attributable to genetics and development are

47 (margin cells) and restoration of wild-type leaf shape (but not leaf size).

48 meobox gene REDUCED COMPLEXITY (RCO) altered leaf shape by changing gene expression from the distal l

49 y mediate the action of auxin in determining leaf shape by repressing outgrowth in areas of low auxin

50 opmental origins of shade-induced changes in leaf shape by swapping plants between light treatments.

51 We arrive at a model that shows how leaf shape can arise through feedback between early patt

52 We suggest that natural variation in leaf shape can be created with a rheostat-like mechanism

53 Because leaf shape can vary in many different ways, theoreticall

54 will improve the discernment of quantitative leaf shape characteristics, and the methods are ready to

55 embryo and emerging leaf symmetry anomalies, leaf shape defects, premature inflorescence development,

56 identified based on trichome, cotyledon, and leaf-shape defects.

57 led with gene duplication and loss generated leaf shape diversity by modifying local growth patterns

58 ), revealing that changes in timing underlie leaf shape diversity.

59 The results show that the overall leaf shape does not change notably during the developmen

60 ons demonstrate that the generation of maize leaf shape does not depend on the precise spatial contro

61 f phenotype would incorporate the changes in leaf shape during juvenile-to-adult phase transitions an

62 rounding environment, both the plasticity of leaf shape during the lifetime of a plant and the evolut

63 Leaf shape elaboration and organ separation are critical

64 Overlapping flaps at borders of oak leaf-shaped endothelial cells of initial lymphatics lack

65 The genetic independence of leaf shape from other leaf traits may therefore enable c

66 production was more important in determining leaf shape, given the constant cell size across the leaf

67 trate that regulated auxin gradients control leaf shape in a KNOX-independent fashion and that inappr

68 UNUSUAL FLORAL ORGANS also alters C. hirsuta leaf shape in an LFY-dependent manner.

69 Leaf shape in Arabidopsis is modulated by patterning eve

70 LEAF3 (SIL3) gene is a novel determinant of leaf shape in Cardamine hirsuta - a dissected-leaved rel

71 , we demonstrate that shade avoidance alters leaf shape in domesticated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)

72 on for increased final leaf size and altered leaf shape in elevated [CO(2)].

73 , but not leaf length, demonstrating changed leaf shape in response to [CO(2)].

74 is responsible for the natural variation in leaf shape in the Galapagean tomatoes.

75 a (l-D1), which is responsible for the major leaf shapes in cotton.

76 nvironment and how they interact to modulate leaf shape is a thorny evolutionary problem, and sophist

77 Leaf shape is associated with venation features that aff

78 cesses is essential during leaf development, leaf shape is highly diverse across the plant kingdom, i

79 A comprehensive understanding of leaf shape is important in many investigations in plant

80 developmental, and environmental effects on leaf shape is lacking.

81 Leaf shape is mutable, changing in ways modulated by bot

82 Leaf shape is spectacularly diverse.

83 A classical view is that leaf shape is the result of local promotion of growth li

84 We demonstrate that A. thaliana leaf shape likely derived from a more complex lobed ance

85 e majority of approaches in the quantitative leaf shape literature, this framework-level approach is

86 ect one-pot synthesis of "tripartite" clover-leaf shaped nanoparticles which would be difficult to ac

87 lele that came to predominate and define the leaf shape of cultivated cotton.

88 sults indicate that subokra is the ancestral leaf shape of tetraploid cotton that gave rise to the ok

89 changes in fruit morphology or the impact of leaf shape on photosynthesis.

90 the lifetime of a plant and the evolution of leaf shape over geologic time are revealing with respect

91 Leaf shape played a unique role in cotton improvement, a

92 ships between leaf N and P stoichiometry and leaf shape ranged from |0.12| to |1.00|, while the slope

93 e margin as a key mediator in the control of leaf shape, separable from a general function of this gr

94 within the leaf and a correlated control of leaf shape, size and symmetry.

95 e that local repression of growth influences leaf shape, suggesting that it could be part of the mech

96 with a novel ornithodiran bauplan including leaf-shaped teeth, a beak-like lower jaw, long, gracile

97 ate necks, laterally expanded pelves, small, leaf-shaped teeth, edentulous rostra and mandibular symp

98 Our model allows a range of observed leaf shapes to be generated and predicts observed clone

99 etic underpinnings of this highly functional leaf shape trait is poor.

100 Leaf shape traits have long been a focus of many discipl

101 inforest shows strong heteroblasty affecting leaf shape, transitioning from juvenile simple leaves to

102 ironmental interactive mechanisms regulating leaf shape variation have not yet been investigated in d

103 ility of LeafAnalyser we also calculated the leaf shape variation in 300 leaves from Arabidopsis thal

104 rovide a high-throughput method to calculate leaf shape variation that allows a large number of leave

105 e were able to summarise the major trends in leaf shape variation using a principal components (PC) a

106 iques to greatly simplify the measurement of leaf shape variation.

107 In addition, leaf shape varies among individuals, populations and spe

108 Leaf shape varies spectacularly among plants.

109 The characteristic leaf shapes we see in all plants are in good part the ou

110 uantitative trait locus (QTL) for C. hirsuta leaf shape, we find that a different process, age-depend

111 merization of both RS2 and AS1 and modulates leaf shape when expressed independently of the Myb domai

112 el that describes the range and variation of leaf shape within standard wild-type lines, and illustra

113 lopment of the meristem, can produce diverse leaf shapes within a plant.

114 ts may therefore enable crop optimization in leaf shape without negative effects on traits such as si