Abstract
Plant hormones play important roles in controlling how plants grow and develop. While metabolism provides the energy needed for plant survival, hormones regulate the pace of plant growth. Strigolactones (SLs) were recently defined as new phytohormones that regulate plant metabolism and, in turn, plant growth and development. This group of phytohormones is derived from carotenoids and has been implicated in a wide range of physiological functions including regulation of plant architecture (inhibition of bud outgrowth and shoot branching), photomorphogenesis, seed germination, nodulation, and physiological reactions to abiotic factors. SLs also induce hyphal branching in germinating spores of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), a process that is important for initiating the connection between host plant roots and AMF. This review outlines the physiological roles of SLs and discusses the significance of interactions between SLs and other phytohormones to plant metabolic responses.
1 Introduction
Phytohormones are plant growth regulators synthesized within plants that participate in many aspects of the plant life cycle, including responses to biotic and abiotic stress [1, 2]. Well known examples of phytohormones include auxin, gibberellin, cytokinin, ethylene and abscisic acid (ABA): these phytohormones play important roles in plant signal transmission and they interact with each other to coordinate physiological, biochemical and morphological function in plant by establishing source/sink transition and controlling nutrient allocation [3, 4]. A variety of other compounds have more recently been recognized as important phytohormones, including a class of steroidal plant hormones called brassinosteroids (BRs), other organic molecules, such as jasmonic acid and salicylic acid and, most recently, strigolactones [5].
Strigolactones (SLs) are carotenoid derivatives that naturally occur in a variety of plants. SLs were first discovered in 1966 as root exudates in cotton plants [6]. The first identified naturally-occurring SL was “Strigol” [7]. SLs were known to be synthesized in roots and stems and to be transported in the xylem [8]. There are several monocots as well as dicots identified as producers of SLs, including sorghum, maize, cotton, cowpea and red clover. To date, about twenty five SLs have been extracted from different plants, of which some are strigol, orobanchol, sorgolactone, 20-epi-orobanchol, solanacol and sorgomol [9, 10]. The most common naturally-occurring SLs are characterized by a butenolide ring (D-ring) and tricyclic ring (ABC-ring), which are coupled with an enol-ether bridge in canonical SLs or to less conserved construction in non-canonical SLs [11, 12].
In 2008, SLs were categorized as a new class of plant hormone in recognition of their various roles in controlling above-ground plant architecture (e.g. by inhibiting bud outgrowth), and in underground communication with adjacent organisms [13, 14]. SLs serve dual functions, as both an endogenous and exogenous signalling molecule. Within the rhizosphere, SLs are responsible for encouraging association between plant roots and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), particularly in nutrient deficient environments [19]. AMF are obligate heterotrophs present in the roots of the land plants that form symbiotic associations with crop plants [15], supplying mineral nutrients in exchange for photosynthetically fixed carbon [16, 17, 18]. They also play an important role in germination of the parasitic plants Striga and Orobanche [19, 20]. Therefore, SLs serve as host detection signals for both AMF and root parasitic plants of the family Orobanchaceae [21]. SLs also play other important roles in the root system: enhancing the length of primary roots and root hairs, encouraging growth of rice crown roots, and suppressing the creation of adventitious roots in Solanum lycopersicum, Arabidopsis thaliana and Pisum sativum [22, 23, 24, 25, 26]. SLs are further involved in various functions related to plant growth and development such as seed germination, early seedling development, internode height, leaf structure and senescence, shoot gravitropism, and stem morphology [27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35]. In addition, SLs regulate the influence of environmental factors such as availability of phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N), light intensity, drought and salinity [36, 37, 38].
This review covers what is currently known about SLs. It first outlines the many roles SLs play, including their roles in responding to plant stress. It then provides details about the biosynthesis and complex signalling mechanisms of SLs. Finally, it includes a discussion of how SLs interact (i.e. crosstalk) with other phytohormones like auxin, cytokinin and ABA.
2 Roles of Strigolactones
SLs are recognised as phytohormones with roles in various developmental processes such as symbiotic mycorrhizal association between fungi and plants, plant growth, and plant development. SLs are uphill work signalling molecules that can travel from below to aboveground parts of plant and exert their effects on shoot branching control [13], host recognition signals for parasitic weeds and AMF, and responses to abiotic stress (Figure 1) [12, 14, 36, 40, 41, 42]. Some of its roles in crops plants are summarized in table 1.
Roles of strigolactones in plant architecture.
Known effects of SLs on plant functions in different plant species
| S.N. | Plant species | Response | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oryza sativa | Enhances chlorophyll content | [29] |
| 2 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Represses lateral root formation | [58] |
| 3 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Increases resistance against abiotic stress | [70] |
| 4 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Promotes seed germination | [74] |
| 5 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Increases root hair elongation | [78] |
| 6 | Lotus japonicus | Delays ABA-dependent stomatal closure | [113] |
| 7 | Pisum sativum, Arabidopsis thaliana | Positively regulates chilling tolerance | [122] |
| 8 | Sinorhizobium meliloti | Enhances surface motility | [123] |
| 9 | Oryza sativa | Inhibits tillering trillering | [124] |
| 10 | Bambusoideae | Accelerates leaf senescence | [125] |
| 11 | Sesbania cannabina | Increases salt tolerance | [126] |
| 12 | Solanum lycopersicum | Plays positive role in nematode defence | [127] |
| 13 | Glycine max | Increases nodulation | [128] |
| 14 | Solanum lycopersicum, Arabidopsis thaliana | Enhances stomatal reactivity | [129] |
| 15 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Reduces salinity and drought stress | [130] |
| 16 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Increases H2O2 and nitric oxide contents | [131] |
| 17 | Arabidopsis thaliana | Provides resistance against bacterial infections with Rhodococcus fascians, Pectobacterium carotovorum, and Pseudomonas syringae | [132] |
2.1 Rhizosphere and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
The rhizosphere is an area of soil surrounding the roots which is a very important environment for AMF [43]. AMF and plants interact with each other through signalling molecules (i.e. SLs) released by plant roots in the rhizosphere [43]. AM symbiosis is a collaborative association of plants with fungi, and is considered one of the greatest associations of plants and microorganisms. SLs play a vital role in this symbiosis [44]. SLs encourage hyphal branching in the area surrounding the host roots, which enhances the possibility of contact between the roots and fungi. Application of synthetic SLs (GR24) enhanced the colonization of mycorrhiza in petunia and pea [14, 45]. In root nodulation by rhizobia, SLs have an important role [46].
2.2 Shoot branching
Branching is an essential developmental process, in which axillary buds develop into flowers; it is controlled by several peripheral and internal factors that determine how energy is allocated within the plant [47]. Among the internal factors, hormones play essential roles in shoot branch management [14]. The well known phytohormones auxin and cytokinin are known to manage bud growth; cytokinin promotes growth [48] while auxin plays the role of repressor [49]. SLs are also recognised as repressors of bud growth [14]. Therefore, cytokinins act antagonistically with SLs [50]. Studies on plant architecture, using mutants, such as decreased apical dominance (dad), high tillering dwarf (htd), more axillary growth (max) and ramosus (rms) were documented in Petunia hybrids, Oryza sativa, Arabidopsis thaliana, and Pisum sativum [51]. In all these cases there is an involvement of inhibitor of branch formation [52]. Application of certain concentrations of GR24 to the rms1 mutant plant retarded the growth of lateral bud. Similarly, exogenous application of SLs inhibited shoot branching and growth of axillary buds [41, 53].
2.3 Rooting and root hair
Research has shown that SLs boost elongation of primary roots and root hairs [54], but repress the formation of lateral roots [55]. MAX2-dependent enhancement in primary root development was noted at all concentrations of applied GR24. In lateral root formation, SLs may affect the auxin efflux by controlling the PIN proteins where auxin regulates positioning, initiation and length of lateral roots [56]. Application of SLs interferes with the PIN auxin-efflux carriers in roots and leads to reduction in the PIN1-GFP intensity in lateral root primordia, thereby altering the auxin concentration necessary for lateral root development [55]. Root hairs soak up water and nutrients from the soil, and also help in the establishment of symbiotic interactions among rhizobia and leguminous plants [57]. SL mutants of Arabidopsis had shorter root hairs than wild types but there were significantly longer root hairs was seen in other mutants (max 3 and max 4 types) and in wild plants after exogenous application of GR24 [58].
2.4 Leaf Senescence
Leaf senescence is an important process observed in the last stage of leaf growth [59]. It is a complex process influenced by various factors such as aging and flowering, dark treatment, nutrient starvation and several stressors [60]. During the process of leaf senescence, nutrients are reapportioned from older to younger tissue [15]. Several phytohormones are involved in the regulation of leaf senescence [61]. ABA, jasmonic acid, salicylic acid and ethylene can stimulate the process of leaf senescence, whereas cytokinins inhibit it [62]. In addition to these phytohormones, SLs also regulate the process of leaf senescence because both SL-deficient and SL-insensitive mutants show a retardation of senescence [63]. Leaf senescence is accelerated by SLs. To explore these effects on plant, GR24 was applied to the leaves of Arabidopsis and rice [29, 64]. Exogenous application of GR24 enhanced leaf senescence in the SL-deficient mutants of both Arabidopsis (max1, max2 and max3) and rice (d27, d17 and d10) [65, 66].
3 Strigolactones and plant stress
3.1 Drought
Among various abiotic stresses, drought is one of the major threats which decrease plant growth and development all over the globe [67, 68]. Similar to other phytohormones (ABA, ethylene, jasmonic acid and salicylic acid), SLs also activate signalling pathways in plants during biotic and abiotic stress conditions [69]. According to Ha et al. [70], SLs positively regulate drought response with the help of ABA signalling, as indicated by decreased sensitivity to ABA of all the max mutants of Arabidopsis under drought stress conditions. It was reported that cross-talk between SL and ABA plays an important role in integrating stress signals to regulate stomatal development and function. Both SL-deficient and SL-response mutants exhibited hypersensitivity to drought. The SL treatment rescued the drought-sensitive phenotype of the SL-deficient mutants but not of the SL-response mutant and stimulated drought tolerance of wild-type plants, confirming the role of SL as a positive regulator in the stress response [70]. Interestingly, it was reported that arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis induces SL biosynthesis under drought conditions and improves drought tolerance in lettuce and tomato. Under such conditions, SLs accumulation will be high that in turn interferes the organization, making it easier for plants to overcome drought stress [71]. The latest study conducted by Min et al. [72] on grapevines provides further evidence of the positive effect of SLs to overcome drought stress.
3.2 Temperature
Heat stress causes a variety of nutritional, hormonal, metabolic and physiological disorders that can result in crop loss [73]. Seed germination is mainly dependent on temperature; generally, high temperature slows the pace of seed germination in plants [74]. It is known that ABA is as negative regulator of seed germination while gibberellin and cytokinin play positive roles in this process [75]. SLs are positive regulators of seed germination in root parasitic weeds as well as in plants. In Philipanche ramose, seed germination capacity was enhanced by SL application, even at high temperature [76]. Seed germination was also enhanced by application of GR-24 under high temperature stress in SL-deficient Arabidopsis mutants [77].
3.3 Light
Light is an important factor influencing normal growth and development of plants, with modulation of light quality and quantity directly related to plant developmental processes [39]. Koltai and Kapulnik [78] found evidence of interactions between light and SLs in a variety of plants. In Arabidopsis plants treated with SLs (GR-24) there was increased expression of genes related to light signalling, whereas in SL-deficient plants there was low expression of those genes [79]. Light intensity modulates the levels of phytohormones, but these phytohormones also affect photoreceptor signal transduction [80]. It is suggested that higher auxin synthesis is directly related to higher production of SLs, increasing the dark-escaping phenotype. Adding evidence of a relationship between SLs and light is the fact that pea mutants produce fewer adventitious roots when compared to wild type seedlings when grown in shade but not under light conditions [15].
3.4 Nutrient deprivation
Availability of nutrients in the soil is very important for normal plant growth and development. Among several nutrients, Phosphorus (P) and Nitrogen (N) are essential for normal plant growth and development. SLs play a crucial role in regulating plant reactions to N and P deficiency through modification of root and/or shoot architecture and promoting symbiosis with N-fixing rhizobial bacteria and AMF [81]. P and N deficient conditions trigger increased production of SLs through an adverse feedback loop, with increased activity of SL biosynthesis genes and decreased activity of SL signalling genes [54, 82]. Under P deficient conditions plants treated with SLs form more lateral roots, whereas SL-deficient plants create fewer lateral roots. The deficiency of P and N in Medicago truncatula leads to over-expression of SL biosynthetic genes CCD7, CCD8, D27 and MAX1 [83]. Yoneyama et al. [84] selected six plant species to study the influence of P and N scarcity on biosynthesis and exudation of SLs. According to their study, there were no changes in alfalfa or tomato under N-deficient conditions, but P-deficiency enhanced the production of SLs in the remaining four plant species.
3.5 Biotic stress
In addition to their important functions in influencing plant architecture, SLs are important regulators of plant resistance against pathogens. Interestingly, promoters of genes involved in SL biosynthesis contain motifs which are recognised by transcription factors (TFs) involved in plant responses to pathogen infection [81]. Moreover, expression of SL-biosynthesis genes in Arabidopsis thaliana and Oryza sativa are under the control of hormones involved in plant defence such as jasmonic acid, salicylic acid and ethylene [85]. It is now known that various plant hormones, such as auxin, gibberellins, ethylene, ABA, salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, BRs and SLs, are important components of the signalling mechanisms of plant defence responses when they encounter pathogens [86]. Application of SLs strongly inhibited the formation and growth of phytopathogenic fungi [87]. SLs may overcome the stresses generated by pathogens at the transcription level with the help of the PROTEINASE INHIBITOR II (PIN II) gene [88]. It is suggested that SLs may be involved in plant immune responses in a particular bacterial and fungal pathogen-specific manner.
4 Signalling of SLs
SL signalling occurs through a precise cellular system that has been described earlier [36, 56, 89]. Based on these previous descriptions, a working model of the SL signalling pathway has been proposed (Figure 2) SLs are perceived by α/β-hydrolase that conveys the signal to a leucine-rich-repeat F-box protein (MAX2 in Arabidopsis; D3 in rice), which can bind to a Skp, Cullin, F-box (SCF)-containing complex. Such binding catalyses the ubiquitination of proteins and initiates the 26S proteasomal degradation of transcription receptors such as SMXLs in Arabidopsis and D53 in rice [90, 91, 92]. The Dwarf 14 (D14) protein is the only known receptor and is an important component of the SL signalling system [93], containing a conserved catalytic serine-histidine-aspartic acid required for hydrolytic activity [63]. This protein was initially identified in rice and later found in several other species [63, 93, 94, 95]. In the presence of SLs, D14 interacts with SLs and, through a nucleophilic attack, a D-ring derived molecule is formed which is covalently sealed in the catalytic active site of D14. This interaction triggers the conformational change of D14, leading to interaction with the D3/MAX2-based SCF complex and D53/D53-like SMXLs proteins, resulting in the degradation of proteins D53 and D53-like SMXLs through ubiquitination. This relieves the transcriptional repression on key downstream genes such as D53 [reviewed by 36, 56, 89]. In the absence of SLs, both D53 and D53-like SMXL proteins interrelate with TPL/ TPR proteins and suppress downstream target genes by repressing the activities of unknown transcription factors (TFs) [5, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100].
![Figure 2 Overview of the SL signalling pathway [Modified from Wang et al. (121)]](/document/doi/10.1515/biol-2020-0022/asset/graphic/j_biol-2020-0022_fig_002.jpg)
Overview of the SL signalling pathway [Modified from Wang et al. (121)]
5 Interactions between SLs and other phytohormones
Communication and coordination among phytohormones is vital for normal plant growth. Cross-talk between hormones is controlled by special key components of signalling pathways [101]. Like other plant hormones, SLs perform several important functions through communication with other plant hormones, including auxin, GA, cytokinin and ethylene [19, 102, 103]. The sub-sections below describe research that has provided evidence of the interactions between SLs and specific other plant hormones.
5.1 SLs and auxin
Auxin is an important signalling molecule for plant growth and development. Auxins and SLs interact with each other in a unique feedback loop [102]. Auxins regulate SL biosynthesis and are involved in various SL-mediated developmental processes [104]. Conversely, SLs promote auxin transport in plant stems, thereby intensifying the contest between axillary branches and axillary bud outgrowth [51]. SLs play a mediator role in auxin-induced secondary messengers, moving upward to the buds and retarding their outgrowth [105]. Auxins regulate the expression of genes responsible for the synthesis of SLs [92]. However, SLs are necessary for auxin to repress decapitation-induced shoot branching [106]. According to Agusti et al. [25], SL biosynthesis and signaling is important for auxin to stimulate vascular cambium activity. SLs promote the removal rate of PIN-FORMED1 (PIN1) protein, thus limiting bud outgrowth [107]. There is also evidence that auxin may interact with SLs to influence the organization of secondary growth, root development and tuberisation [108]. SLs influence and regulate auxin pathways either by facilitating auxin transport or by stimulating transcription of the auxin receptor TIR1 [19].
5.2 SLs and cytokinin
Cytokinins are known to be important for a diverse range of functions in plant growth and development, influencing many agriculturally important processes [109]. SLs co-ordinate plant growth and development through cross-talk mechanisms not only with auxin and ABA, but also with other phytohormones like cytokinin and GA [19]. SLs obstruct bud outgrowth [14], while cytokinin enhances bud outgrowth. Cytokinin and SLs both act on the bud specific gene BRANCHED 1 (BRC1) that encodes a transcription factor which represses bud outgrowth in Pisum sativum [50]. Auxins act as a secondary messenger that works in contrast to cytokinin by elevating SL levels [50]. In Pisum sativum, exogenous application of SLs retards axillary shoot length both under decapitation [110], or induced by cytokinin [50], adding further evidence of interactions between SLs and cytokinin.
5.3 SLs and abscisic acid (ABA)
In addition to influencing soil organisms, SLs control plant morphology and help plants respond to adverse conditions, possibly through crosstalk with ABA. SLs and ABA have similar structures, which suggest a potential connection in their biosynthesis [103]. Both SLs and ABA derive from a carotenoid pathway, in which all-trans-isomers are connected through a biosynthetic pathway of carotenoid leading from all-trans-β-carotene to all-trans-violaxanthin (Figure 3) [20]. Therefore, it is inferred that homeostasis of both hormones is mutually dependent. The isomerization activity of 9-cis/all-trans-β-carotene of the DWARF27 (D27) protein might represent possible interactions of SLs with ABA biosynthesis. Root exudates of ABA-deficient maize plants, with a null mutation in the ABA-biosynthetic gene (ZmNCED1), induced considerably diminished germination of parasitic seeds, and this effect is suggested to be a result of low SL content [111]. In tomatoes, reduction in ABA concentration (through chemical or genetic approaches) represses the biosynthesis of SLs [112]. Changes in the level or sensitivity to SLs influence ABA concentrations and ABA responses. The interactions between SLs and ABA are organism-dependent. SL biosynthetic mutants of Lycopersicon esculentum and Lotus japonicus are less resistant to drought stress which is also associated with elevated ABA levels in the leaves, an example of a positive interaction between the two phytohormones. Osmotic stress rapidly and sharply decreased SL content in tissues of wild-type Lotus roots [113] and drought stress reduced SL levels while increasing ABA content in Lotus japonicus, Lycopersicon esculentum and Lactuca sativa [71]. It is also known that SL metabolism and its effects on ABA homeostasis are opposite in roots and shoots under stress [113]. It is evident from the above observations that SL and ABA often fluctuate together under varied conditions with an impact on plant metabolism.
![Figure 3 Cross-talk between SLs and ABA [Modified from Ruyter-Spira (55)]](/document/doi/10.1515/biol-2020-0022/asset/graphic/j_biol-2020-0022_fig_003.jpg)
Cross-talk between SLs and ABA [Modified from Ruyter-Spira (55)]
SL signalling mechanisms may co-ordinate with auxin instability in root tips, following disruption in lateral root initiation (Figure 4). According to Koren et al. [114], SL signalling regulates auxin flux into the root tip in association with SL effects on meristem size. Furthermore, auxin and cytokinin crosstalk balances demarcation and cell partitioning in the meristem of the root tip to control root size [115]. In root apical meristem, the gene SHY2 plays a regulatory role in determining the auxin-cytokinin balance [115]. Auxin inhibits SHY2 activity, while cytokinin promotes the transcription of SHY2. The PIN gene is repressed by SHY2, which negatively effects the expression of PIN1, PIN4, PIN3 or PIN2 transport in the root tip. Thus, cytokinin positively regulates activity of the SHY2 gene, which enhances the flux of auxin, which ultimately affects cell division [115]. Moreover, by disturbing auxin homeostasis, SHY2 signalling stimulates the development of existing lateral roots but inhibits their initiation [116]. Effects of SLs on lateral root initiation are mediated through auxin transport where SHY2 is used as a molecular switch (Figure 4).
![Figure 4 Crosstalk mechanisms between SLs, auxin and cytokinin in root tips. Brown arrows show auxin flux while black arrows and lines show assumed regulation pathways. [Figure adapted from Perilli (115), Koren (114) and Ruyter-Spira (55)]](/document/doi/10.1515/biol-2020-0022/asset/graphic/j_biol-2020-0022_fig_004.jpg)
5.4 SLs and brassinosteroids (BR)
Crosstalk between SL and BR signalling pathways has only recently been discovered and a complete picture of this inter-hormonal crosstalk is still emerging. What is known is that this signalling interaction is mediated by crucial components of the SL and BR signalling relays. The E3 ubiquitin ligase MAX2 is a key SL signalling component, and is known to function as an inhibitor of shoot branching [80]. MAX2 directly interacts with the BZR1 and BES1 transcription factors, which are key regulators of the BR-dependent gene expression [117, 118, 119, 120]. It was reported that BZR1 and BES1 constantly interact with the MAX2 E3 ubiquitin ligase. MAX2 directly binds BZR1 and BES1, leading to degradation of these transcription factors. SL signaling promotes the MAX2-mediated degradation of the BZR1/BES1 transcription factors, and results in suppressed shoot branching. Therefore, it has been postulated that BR and SL regulate the same developmental process by modulating BZR1/BES1 stability [80].
6 Conclusion and future prospective
This review presents evidence that SLs are involved in a variety of processes in plant physiology and development. SLs can regulate symbiotic associations of plants with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, influence plant development and control plant metabolism under normal as well as stressful conditions. Only limited information is available on how SLs induce regulation of leaf senescence. However, there has been extensive research showing how important interactions between SLs and other phytohormones are for the regulation of plant growth and development. Although past research has led to considerable insight into the physiological roles of SLs, it is obvious that new functions of SLs have yet to be discovered. Interdisciplinary research is an important tool to broaden the knowledge in this area.
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.
- ABA
Abscisic acid
- AMF
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
- BES 1
BRI1-EMSSUPPRESSOR1
- BRC 1
BRANCHED 1
- BRs
Brassinosteroids
- BZR 1
BRASSINAZOLE RESISTANT1
- CCD7
CAROTENOID CLEAVAGE DIOXYGENASE8
- CCD8
CAROTENOID CLEAVAGE DIOXYGENASE8
- D14
Dwarf 14
- D27
DWARF27
- D53
Dwarf 53
- dad
Decreased apical dominance
- htd
High tillering dwarf
- MAX 1
More axillary growth 2
- MAX 2
More axillary growth 2
- N
Nitrogen
- P
Phosphorus
- PIN
PIN-FORMED
- PIN II
PROTEINASE INHIBITOR II
- rms
Ramosus
- SCF
Skp-Cullin-F-box
- SCF
Skp, Cullin, F-box
- SHY2
SHORT HYPOCOTYL 2
- SLs
Strigolactones
- SMXL
SMAX1-LIKE
- TFs
Transcription factors
- TIR1
TRANSPORT INHIBITOR RESPONSE 1
- TPL
TOPLESS
- TPR
TOPLESS-RELATED
References
[1] Peleg Z, Blumwald E. Hormone balance and abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2011;14:290–295.10.1016/j.pbi.2011.02.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[2] Llanes A, Reginato M, Devinar G, Luna, V. What is known about phytohormones in halophytes? A review. Biologia. 2018;73(8):727-742.10.2478/s11756-018-0093-7Search in Google Scholar
[3] Iqbal N, Umar S, Khan NA, Khan MIR. A new perspective of phytohormones in salinity tolerance: regulation of proline metabolism. Environ Exp Bot. 2014;100:34–42.10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.12.006Search in Google Scholar
[4] Fahad S, Hussain S, Matloob A, Khan FA, Khaliq A, Saud S, et al. Phytohormones and plant responses to salinity stress: a review. Plant Growth Regul. 2015;75:391–404.10.1007/s10725-014-0013-ySearch in Google Scholar
[5] Smith SM, Li J. Signalling and responses to strigolactones and karrikins. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2014;21:23-29.10.1016/j.pbi.2014.06.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] Pandey A, Sharma M, Pandey GK. Emerging roles of strigolactones in plant responses to stress and development. Frontiers in Plant Sci. 2016;7:434.10.3389/fpls.2016.00434Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[7] Cook CE, Whichard LP, Turner B, Wall ME, Egley GH. Germination of witchweed (Striga lutea Lour.): isolation and properties of a potent stimulant. Science. 1966;154:1189-90.10.1126/science.154.3753.1189Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[8] Kohlen W, Charnikhova T, Liu Q, Bours R, Domagalska MA, Beguerie S, et al. Strigolactones are transported through the xylem and play a key role in shoot architectural response to phosphate deficiency in nonarbuscular mycorrhizal host Arabidopsis Plant Physiol. 2011;155:974–987.10.1104/pp.110.164640Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[9] Sato D, Awad AA, Takeuchi Y, Yoneyama K. Confirmation and quantification of strigolactones, germination stimulants for root parasitic plants Striga and Orobanche produced by cotton. Biosci Biotech Biochem. 2005;69:98-102.10.1271/bbb.69.98Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[10] Koltai H. Cellular events of strigolactone signalling and their crosstalk with auxin in roots. J Exp Bot. 2015;66:4855-4861.10.1093/jxb/erv178Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[11] Al-Babili S, Bouwmeester HJ. Strigolactones a novel carotenoid-derived plant hormone. Ann Rev Plant Biol. 2015;66:161-86.10.1146/annurev-arplant-043014-114759Search in Google Scholar
[12] Jia KP, Baz L, Al-Babili S. From carotenoids to strigolactones. J Exp Bot. 2018;69:2189–2204.10.1093/jxb/erx476Search in Google Scholar
[13] Gomez-Roldan V, Fermas S, Brewer PB, Puech-Pages V, Dun EA, Pillot JP, et al. Strigolactone inhibition of shoot branching. Nature. 2008;455:189–194.10.1038/nature07271Search in Google Scholar
[14] Umehara M, Hanada A, Yoshida S, Akiyama K, Arite T, Takeda-Kamiya N, et al. Inhibition of shoot branching by new terpenoid plant hormones. Nature. 2008;455:196-200.10.1038/nature07272Search in Google Scholar
[15] Brundrett MC, Tedersoo L. Evolutionary history of mycorrhizal symbioses and global host plant diversity. New Phytologist. 2018;doi: 10.1111/nph.14976.10.1111/nph.14976Search in Google Scholar
[16] Jiang Y, Wang W, Xie Q, Liu N, Liu L, Wang D, et al. Plants transfer lipids to sustain colonization by mutualistic mycorrhizal and parasitic fungi. Science. 2017;356:1172–1175.10.1126/science.aam9970Search in Google Scholar
[17] Keymer A, Pimprikar P, Wewer V, Huber C, Brands M, Bucerius SL, et al. Lipid transfer from plants to arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi. Elife. 2017; 6:e29107.10.7554/eLife.29107Search in Google Scholar
[18] Luginbuehl LH, Menard GN, Kurup S, Van Erp H, Radhakrishnan GV, Breakspear A, et al. Fatty acids in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi are synthesized by the host plant. Science. 2017;356:1175–1178.10.1126/science.aan0081Search in Google Scholar
[19] Bouwmeester HJ, Matusova R, Zhongkui S, Beale MH. Secondary metabolite signalling in host-parasitic plant interactions. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2003;6:358–364.10.1016/S1369-5266(03)00065-7Search in Google Scholar
[20] Akiyama K, Matsuzaki K, Hayashi H. Plant sesquiterpenes induce hyphal branching in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Nature. 2005;435:824-827.10.1038/nature03608Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[21] Bouwmeester HJ, Roux C, Lopez-Raez JA, Becard G. Rhizosphere communication of plants, parasitic plants and AM fungi. Trends Plant Sci. 2007;12: 224-230.10.1016/j.tplants.2007.03.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[22] Arite T, Kameoka H, Kyozuka J. Strigolactone positively controls crown root elongation in rice. J Plant Growth Regul. 2012;31:165–172.10.1007/s00344-011-9228-6Search in Google Scholar
[23] Kohlen W, Charnikhova T, Lammers M, Pollina T, Toth P, Haider I, et al. The tomato CAROTENOID CLEAVAGE DIOXYGENASE8 (SlCCD8) regulates rhizosphere signaling, plant architecture and affects reproductive development through strigolactone biosynthesis. New Phytol. 2012;196:535–547.10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04265.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[24] Kagiyama M, Hirano Y, Mori T, Kim SY, Kyozuka J, Seto Y, et al. Structures of D14 and D14L in the strigolactone and karrikin signaling pathways. Genes Cells. 2013;18:147–160.10.1111/gtc.12025Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[25] Rasmussen A, Depuydt S, Goormachtig S, Geelen D. Strigolactones fine-tune the root system. Planta. 2013;238:615-626.10.1007/s00425-013-1911-3Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Urquhart S, Foo E, Reid JB. The role of strigolactones in photomorphogenesis of pea is limited to adventitious rooting. Physiol Plant. 2015;153:392–402.10.1111/ppl.12246Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[27] Stirnberg P, van De Sande K, Leyser HM. MAX1 and MAX2 control shoot lateral branching in Arabidopsis Development. 2002;129:1131–1141.10.1242/dev.129.5.1131Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[28] Snowden KC, Simkin AJ, Janssen BJ, Templeton KR, Loucas HM, Simons JL, et al. The decreased apical dominance1/Petunia hybrida CAROTENOID CLEAVAGE DIOXYGENASE8 gene affects branch production and plays a role in leaf senescence, root growth, and flower development. Plant Cell. 2005;17:746–759.10.1105/tpc.104.027714Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[29] Tsuchiya Y, Vidaurre D, Toh S, Hanada A, Nambara E, Kamiya Y, et al. A small-molecule screen identifies new functions for the plant hormone strigolactone. Nat Chem Biol. 2010;6:741–749.10.1038/nchembio.435Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[30] Agusti J, Herold S, Schwarz M, Sanchez P, Ljung K, Dun EA, et al. Strigolactone signaling is required for auxin-dependent stimulation of secondary growth in plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:20242–20247.10.1073/pnas.1111902108Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[31] Toh S, Kamiya Y, Kawakami N, Nambara E, McCourt P, Tsuchiya Y. Thermoinhibition uncovers a role for strigolactones in Arabidopsis seed germination. Plant Cell Physiol. 2012;53:107–117.10.1093/pcp/pcr176Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[32] Scaffidi A, Waters MT, Ghisalberti EL, Dixon KW, Flematti GR, Smith SM. Carlactone-independent seedling morphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Plant J. 2013;76:1–9.10.1111/tpj.12265Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[33] de Saint Germain A, Ligerot Y, Dun EA, Pillot JP, Ross JJ, Beveridge CA, et al. Strigolactones stimulate internode elongation independently of gibberellins. Plant Physiol. 2013;163:1012–1025.10.1104/pp.113.220541Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[34] Yamada Y, Furusawa S, Nagasaka S, Shimomura K, Yamaguchi S, Umehara M. Strigolactone signaling regulates rice leaf senescence in response to a phosphate deficiency. Planta. 2014;240:399-408.10.1007/s00425-014-2096-0Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[35] Sang D, Chen D, Liu G, Liang Y, Huang L, Meng X, et al. Strigolactones regulate rice tiller angle by attenuating shoot gravitropism through inhibiting auxin biosynthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:11199–111204.10.1073/pnas.1411859111Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[36] Waldie T, McCulloch H, Leyser O. Strigolactones and the control of plant development: lessons from shoot branching. Plant J. 2014;79:607–622.10.1111/tpj.12488Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[37] Sun H, Tao J, Gu P, Xu G, Zhang Y. The role of strigolactones in root development. Plant Signal Behav. 2016;11:e1110662.10.1080/15592324.2015.1110662Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[38] Zwanenburg B, Pospisil T, Cavar Zeljkovic S. Strigolactones: new plant hormones in action. Planta. 2016;243:1311–1326.10.1007/s00425-015-2455-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[39] Cheng X, Ruyter-Spira C, Bouwmeester H. The interaction between strigolactones and other plant hormones in the regulation of plant development. Front Plant Sci. 2013;4:199.10.3389/fpls.2013.00199Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[40] Akiyama K. Chemical identification and functional analysis of apocarotenoids involved in the development of arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Biosci, Biotech, Biochem. 2007;71:1405–1414.10.1271/bbb.70023Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[41] Dun EA, de-Saint GA, Rameau C, Beveridge CA. Dynamics of strigolactone function and shoot branching responses in Pisum sativum Mol Plant. 2013;6:128-140.10.1093/mp/sss131Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[42] Gough C, Becard G. Strigolactone and lipid-chitooligosaccharides as molecular communication signals in the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. In Molecular Mycorrhizal Symbiosis, ed. Martin F, 2016;107-124 Wiley- Black well, New Jersey.10.1002/9781118951446.ch7Search in Google Scholar
[43] Bais HP, Weir TL, Perry LG, Gilroy S, Vivanco JM. The role of root exudates in rhizosphere interactions with plants and other organisms. Ann Rev Plant Biol. 2006;57:233–266.10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105159Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[44] Bonfante P, Genre A. Mechanisms underlying beneficial plant-fungus interactions in mycorrhizal symbiosis. Nat Commun. 2010;1:1–11.10.1038/ncomms1046Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[45] Breuillin F, Schramm J, Hajirezaei M, Ahkami A, Favre P, Druege U, et al. Phosphate systemically inhibits development of arbuscular mycorrhiza in Petunia hybrida and represses genes involved in mycorrhizal functioning. Plant J. 2010;64:1002–1017.10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04385.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[46] Foo E, Davies NW. Strigolactones promote nodulation in pea. Planta. 2011;234:1073-1081.10.1007/s00425-011-1516-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[47] Leyser O. The control of shoot branching: an example of plant information processing. Plant, Cell and Environ. 2009;32:694-703.10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.01930.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[48] Sachs T, Thimann KV. The role of auxins and cytokinins in the release of buds from apical dominance. Am J Bot. 1967;45:136-144.10.1002/j.1537-2197.1967.tb06901.xSearch in Google Scholar
[49] Thimann KV, Skoog F. On the inhibition of bud development and other functions of growth substances in Vicia faba Proc Roy Soc London Ser B. 1934;114:317-339.10.1098/rspb.1934.0010Search in Google Scholar
[50] Dun EA, de-Saint GA, Rameau C, Beveridge CA. Antagonistic action of strigolactone and cytokinin in bud outgrowth control. Plant Physiol. 2012;158:487-498.10.1104/pp.111.186783Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[51] Domagalska MA, Leyser O. Signal integration in the control of shoot branching. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2011;12:211–221.10.1038/nrm3088Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[52] Simons JL, Napoli CA, Janssen BJ, Plummer KM, Snowden KC. Analysis of the DECREASED APICAL DOMINANCE genes of petunia in the control of axillary branching. Plant Physiol. 2007;143:697-706.10.1104/pp.106.087957Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[53] Barbier FF, Dun EA, Kerr SC, Chabikwa TG, Beveridge CA. An update on the signals controlling shoot branching. Trends in Plant Science. 2019;24(3):220-236.10.1016/j.tplants.2018.12.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[54] Sun H, Tao J, Liu S, Huang S, Chen S, Xie X, et al. Strigolactones are involved in phosphate- and nitrate-deficiency-induced root development and auxin transport in rice. J Exp Bot. 2014;65:6735–6746.10.1093/jxb/eru029Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[55] Ruyter-Spira C, Kohlen W, Charnikhova T, van Zeijl A, van Bezouwen L, de-Ruijter N, et al. Physiological effects of the synthetic strigolactone analog GR24 on root system architecture in Arabidopsis: another belowground role for strigolactones? Plant Physiol. 2011;155:721-34.10.1104/pp.110.166645Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[56] Koltai H. Receptors, repressors, PINs: a playground for strigolactone signalling. Trends Plant Sci. 2014;19:727-733.10.1016/j.tplants.2014.06.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[57] Jones VAS, Dolan L. The evolution of root hairs and rhizoids. Ann Bot. 2012;110:205-212.10.1093/aob/mcs136Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[58] Kapulnik Y, Delaux PM, Resnick N, Mayzlish-Gati E, Wininger S, Bhattacharya C, et al. Strigolactones affect lateral root formation and root-hair elongation in Arabidopsis Planta. 2011;233:209-216.10.1007/s00425-010-1310-ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[59] Nooden LD. The phenomena of senescence and aging. In Senescence and aging in plants, Leopold AC, Nooden LD, Eds. Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA. 1988;1–50.10.1016/B978-0-12-520920-5.50007-9Search in Google Scholar
[60] Lim PO, Kim HJ, Nam HG. Leaf senescence. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2007;5:115-136.10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105316Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[61] Kusaba M, Tanaka A, Tanaka R. Stay-green plants: what do they tell us about the molecular mechanism of leaf senescence. Photosynth Res. 2013;117:221–234.10.1007/s11120-013-9862-xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[62] Jibran R, Hunter DA, Dijkwel PP. Hormonal regulation of leaf senescence through integration of developmental and stress signals. Plant Mol Biol. 2013;82:547-561.10.1007/s11103-013-0043-2Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[63] Hamiaux C, Drummond RS, Janssen BJ, Ledger SE, Cooney JM, Newcomb RD, et al. DAD2 is an α/β hydrolase likely to be involved in the perception of the plant branching hormone, strigolactone. Current Biology. 2012;22(21):2032‐2036.10.1016/j.cub.2012.08.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[64] Ueda H, Kusaba M. Strigolactone regulates leaf senescence in concert with ethylene in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol. 2015;169(1):138-47.10.1104/pp.15.00325Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[65] Yamada Y, Umehara M. Possible Roles of Strigolactones during Leaf Senescence. Plants. 2015;4:664-677.10.3390/plants4030664Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[66] Joshi N, Nautiyal P, Papnai G. Unravelling diverse roles of strigolactones in stimulating plant growth and alleviating various stress conditions: A review. J Pharmaco Phytochem. 2019;8(5):396-404.Search in Google Scholar
[67] Geliolo Salgado OG, Teodoro JC, Alyarenga JP, Oliveira C, Carvalho TS, Domiciano D, et al. Cerium alleviates drought-induced stress in Phaseolus vulgaris J Rare Earths. 2019;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jre.2019.07.01410.1016/j.jre.2019.07.014Search in Google Scholar
[68] Trenberth KE, Dai A, Van Der Schrier G, Jones PD, Barichivich J, Briffa KR, et al. Global warming and changes in drought. Nat Clim Change. 2014;4:17–22.10.1038/nclimate2067Search in Google Scholar
[69] Xiong L, Schumaker KS, Zhu JK. Cell signaling during cold, drought, and salt stress. Plant Cell. 2002;14:165–183.10.1105/tpc.000596Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[70] Ha CV, Leyva-Gonzalez MA, Osakabes Y, Tran UT, Nishiyama R, Watanabe Y, et al. Positive regulatory role of strigolactone in plant responses to drought and salt stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:851–856.10.1073/pnas.1322135111Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[71] Ruiz-Lozano JM, Aroca R, Zamarreno AM, Molina S, Andreo-Jimenez B, Porcel R, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis induces strigolactone biosynthesis under drought and improves drought tolerance in lettuce and tomato. Plant Cell Environ. 2016;39(2):441-52.10.1111/pce.12631Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[72] Min Z, Li R, Chen L, Zhang Y, Li Z, Liu M, et al. Alleviation of drought stress in grapevine by foliar-applied strigolactones. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2019;135:99-110.10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.11.037Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[73] Parvin K, Nahar K, Hasanuzzaman M, Bhuyan MHMB, Fujita M. Calcium-Mediated Growth Regulation and Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Plants. In: Hasanuzzaman M., Hakeem K., Nahar K., Alharby H. (eds) Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Springer, Cham. 2019.10.1007/978-3-030-06118-0Search in Google Scholar
[74] Mishra S, Upadhyay S, Shukla RK. The Role of Strigolactones and Their Potential Cross-talk under Hostile Ecological Conditions in Plants. Frontiers in Physiol. 2017; doi: 10.3389/fphys.2016.00691.10.3389/fphys.2016.00691Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[75] Miransari M, Smith DL. Plant hormones and seed germination. Environ Exp Bot. 2014;99:110-121.10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.11.005Search in Google Scholar
[76] Lechat MM, Brun G, Montiel G, Veronesi C, Simier P, Thoiron S, et al. Seed response to strigolactone is controlled by abscisic acid independent DNA methylation in obligate root parasitic plant, Phelipanche ramose L. Pomel. J Exp Bot. 2015;66:3129–3140.10.1093/jxb/erv119Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[77] Tsuchiya Y, Vidaurre D, Toh S, Hanada A, Nambara E, Kamiya Y, et al. A small-molecule screen identifies new functions for the plant hormone strigolactone. Nat Chem Biol. 2010;6:741–749.10.1038/nchembio.435Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[78] Koltai H, Kapulnik Y. Strigolactones as mediators of plant growth responses to environmental conditions. Plant Signal Behav. 2011;6:37-41.10.4161/psb.6.1.13245Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[79] Mashiguchi K, Sasaki E, Shimada Y, Nagae M, Ueno K, Nakano T, et al. Feedback-regulation of strigolactone biosynthetic genes and strigolactone-regulated genes in Arabidopsis Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2009;73:2460–2465.10.1271/bbb.90443Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[80] Wang Q, Zhu Z, Ozkardesh K, Lin C. Phytochromes and phytohormones: the shrinking degree of separation. Mol Plant. 2013;6:5–7.10.1093/mp/sss102Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[81] Marzec M. Strigolactones as part of the plant defence system. Trends Plant Sci. 2016;16:30121–30122.10.1016/j.tplants.2016.08.010Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[82] Jamil M, Charnikhova T, Cardoso C, Jamil T, Ueno K, Verstappen F, et al. Quantification of the relationship between strigolac- tones and Striga hermonthica infection in rice under varying levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. Weed Res. 2011;51:373–385.10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00847.xSearch in Google Scholar
[83] Bonneau L, Huguet S, Wipf D, Pauly N, Truong HN. Combined phosphate and nitrogen limitation generates a nutrient stress transcriptome favorable for arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis in Medicago truncatula. New Phytol. 2013;199:188–202.10.1111/nph.12234Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[84] Yoneyama K, Xie X, Kim HI, Kisugi T, Nomura T, Sekimoto H, et al. How do nitrogen and phosphorus deficiencies affect strigolactone production and exudation? Planta. 2012;235:1197–1207.10.1007/s00425-011-1568-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[85] Marzec M, Muszynska A. In silico analysis of the genes encoding proteins that are involved in the biosynthesis of the RMS/MAX/D pathway revealed new roles of strigolactones in plants. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16:6757–6782.10.3390/ijms16046757Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[86] Robert-Seilaniantz A, Grant M, Jones JD. Hormone crosstalk in plant disease and defense: more than just jasmonate-salicylate antagonism. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2011;49:317-43.10.1146/annurev-phyto-073009-114447Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[87] Dor E, Joel DM, Kapulnik Y, Koltai H, Hershenhorn J. The synthetic strigolactone GR24 influences the growth pattern of phytopathogenic fungi. Planta. 2011;234:419–427.10.1007/s00425-011-1452-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[88] Torres-Vera R, Garcia JM, Pozo MJ, Lopez-Raez JA. Do strigolactones contribute to plant defense? Mol. Plant Pathol. 2014;15 211–216.10.1111/mpp.12074Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[89] Waters MT, Scaffidi A, Sun YMK, Flematti GR, Smith SM. The karrikin response system of Arabidopsis. Plant J. 2014;79:623–631.10.1111/tpj.12430Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[90] Moon J, Parry G, Estelle M. The ubiquitin–proteasome pathway and plant development. The Plant Cell. 2004;16:3181–3195.10.1105/tpc.104.161220Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[91] Ishikawa S, Maekawa M, Arite T, Onishi K, Takamure I, Kyozuka J. Suppression of tiller bud activity in tillering dwarf mutants of rice. Plant Cell Physiol. 2005;46:79–86.10.1093/pcp/pci022Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[92] Johnson X, Brcich T, Dun EA, Goussot M, Haurogne K, Beveridge CA, et al. Branching genes are conserved across species: genes controlling a novel signal in pea are coregulated by other long-distance signals. Plant Physiol. 2006;142:1014–1026.10.1104/pp.106.087676Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[93] Arite T, Umehara M, Ishikawa S, Hanada A, Maekawa M, Yamaguchi S, et al. D14, a strigolactone‐insensitive mutant of rice, shows an accelerated outgrowth of tillers. Plant and Cell Physiol. 2009;50(8):1416‐1424.10.1093/pcp/pcp091Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[94] Waters MT, Nelson DC, Scaffidi A, Flematti GR, Sun YK, Dixon KW, et al. Specialisation within the DWARF14 protein family confers distinct responses to karrikins and strigolactones in Arabidopsis. Development. 2012;139(7):1285‐1295.10.1242/dev.074567Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[95] Marzec M, Gruszka D, Tylec P, Szarejko I. Identification and functional analysis of the HvD14 gene involved in strigolactone signaling in Hordeum vulgare. Physiologia Plantarum. 2016;158(3):341‐355.10.1111/ppl.12460Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[96] Jiang L, Liu X, Xiong G, Liu H, Chen F, Wang L, et al. DWARF 53 acts as a repressor of strigolactone signalling in rice. Nature. 2013;504:401–405.10.1038/nature12870Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[97] Zhou F, Lin Q, Zhu L, Ren Y, Zhou K, Shabek N, et al. D14-SCFD3-dependent degradation of D53 regulates strigolactone signalling. Nature. 2013;504:406–410.10.1038/nature12878Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[98] Soundappan I, Bennett T, Morffy N, Liang Y, Stanga JP, Abbas A, et al. SMAX1-LIKE/D53 family members enable distinct MAX2-dependent responses to strigolactones and karrikins in Arabidopsis Plant Cell. 2015;27:3143–3159.10.1105/tpc.15.00562Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[99] Wang L, Wang B, Jiang L, Liu X, Li X, Lu Z, et al. Strigolactone signaling in Arabidopsis regulates shoot development by targeting D53-Like SMXL repressor proteins for ubiquitination and degradation. Plant Cell. 2015;27:3128–3142.10.1105/tpc.15.00605Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[100] Yao R, Ming Z, Yan L, Li S, Wang F, Ma S, et al. DWARF14 is a non-canonical hormone receptor for strigolactone. Nature. 2016;536:469–473.10.1038/nature19073Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[101] Santner A, Estelle M. Recent advances and emerging trends in plant hormone signalling. Nature. 2009;459:1071-1078.10.1038/nature08122Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[102] Hayward A, Stirnberg P, Beveridge C, Leyser O. Interactions between auxin and strigolactone in shoot branching control. Plant Physiol. 2009;151(1):400-412.10.1104/pp.109.137646Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[103] Alder A, Jamil M, Marzorati M, Bruno M, Vermathin M, Bigler P, et al. The path from β-carotene to carlactone, a strigolactone-like plant hormone. Science. 2012;335:1348–1351.10.1126/science.1218094Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[104] Crawford S, Shinohara N, Sieberer T, Williamson L, George G, Hepworth J, et al. Strigolactones enhance competition between shoot branches by dampening auxin transport. Development 2010;137:2905–2913.10.1242/dev.051987Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[105] Ferguson BJ, Beveridge CA. Roles for auxin, cytokinin, and strigolactone in regulating shoot branching. Plant Physiol. 2009;149:1929-1944.10.1104/pp.109.135475Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[106] Beveridge CA, Symons GM, Turnbull CG. Auxin inhibition of decapitation-induced branching is dependent on graft-transmissible signals regulated by genes Rms1 and Rms2. Plant Physiol. 2000;123:689-698.10.1104/pp.123.2.689Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[107] Prusinkiewicz P, Crawford C, Smith R, Ljung K, Bennett T, Ongaro V, et al. Control of bud activation by an auxin transport switch. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:17431-17436.10.1073/pnas.0906696106Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[108] Roumeliotis E, Kloosterman B, Oortwijn M, Kohlen W, Bouwmeester HJ, Visser RGF, et al. The effects of auxin and strigolactones on tuber initiation and stolon architecture in potato. J Exp Bot. 2012;63:4539-4547.10.1093/jxb/ers132Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[109] Kieber JJ, Schaller GE. Cytokinin signaling in plant development. The company of Biologists. 2018;145:doi: 10.1242/dev.149344.10.1242/dev.149344Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[110] Brewer PB, Dun EA, Ferguson BJ, Rameau C, Beveridge CA. Strigolactone acts downstream of auxin to regulate bud outgrowth in pea and Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2009;150:482-493.10.1104/pp.108.134783Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[111] Matusova R, Rani K, Verstappen FWA, Franssen MCR, Beale MH, Bouwmeester HJ. The strigolactone germination stimulants of the plant-parasitic Striga and Orobanche spp. are derived from the carotenoid pathway. Plant Physiol. 2005;139:920–934.10.1104/pp.105.061382Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[112] Lopez-Raez JA, Verhage A, Fernandez I, Garcia JM, Azcon-Aguilar C, Flors V, et al. Hormonal and transcriptional profiles highlight common and differential host responses to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and the regulation of the oxylipin pathway. J Exp Bot. 2010;61:2589-2601.10.1093/jxb/erq089Search in Google Scholar
[113] Liu J, He H, Vitali M, Visentin I, Charnikhova T, Haider I, et al. Osmotic stress represses strigolactone biosynthesis in Lotus japonicus roots: exploring the interaction between strigolactones and ABA under abiotic stress. Planta. 2015;241:1435-1451.10.1007/s00425-015-2266-8Search in Google Scholar
[114] Koren D, Resnick N, Gati EM, Belausov E, Weininger S, Kapulnik Y, et al. Strigolactone signaling in the endodermis is sufficient to restore root responses and involves SHORT HYPOCOTYL 2 (SHY2) activity. New Phytol. 2013;198:866-874.10.1111/nph.12189Search in Google Scholar
[115] Perilli S, Di Mambro R, Sabatini S. Growth and development of the root apical meristem. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2012;15:17-23.10.1016/j.pbi.2011.10.006Search in Google Scholar
[116] Goh T, Joi S, Mimura T, Fukaki H. The establishment of asymmetry in Arabidopsis lateral root founder cells is regulated by LBD16/ASL18 and related LBD/ASL proteins. Development. 2012;139:883–893.10.1242/dev.071928Search in Google Scholar
[117] He JX, Gendron MJ, Sun Y, Gampala SS, Gendron N, Sun CQ, et al. BZR1 is a transcriptional repressor with dual roles in brassinosteroid homeostasis and growth responses. Science. 2005;307:1634–1638.10.1126/science.1107580Search in Google Scholar
[118] Yin Y, Wang ZY, Mora-Garcia S, Li J, Yoshida S, Asami T, et al. BES1 accumulates in the nucleus in response to brassinosteroids to regulate gene expression and promote stem elongation. Cell. 2002;109:181–191.10.1016/S0092-8674(02)00721-3Search in Google Scholar
[119] Li L, Xu J, Xu ZH, Xue HW. Brassinosteroids stimulate plant tropisms through modulation of polar auxin transport in Brassica and Arabidopsis. Plant Cell. 2005;17:2738–2753.10.1105/tpc.105.034397Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[120] Kim TW, Wang ZY. Brassinosteroid Signal Transduction from Receptor Kinases to Transcription Factors. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2010;61:681–704.10.1146/annurev.arplant.043008.092057Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[121] Wang B, Wang Y, Li J. Strigolactones; Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China. 2017.Search in Google Scholar
[122] Cooper JW, Hu Y, Beyyoudh L, Yildiz DH, Kunert K, Beveridge CA, et al. Strigolactones positively regulate chilling tolerance in pea and in Arabidopsis Plant Cell Environ. 2018;41:1298–1310.10.1111/pce.13147Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[123] Pelaez-Vico M, Roda LB, Kohlen W, Soto MJ, Lopez-Raez JA. Strigolactones in the Rhizobium-legume symbiosis: Stimulatory effect on bacterial surface motility and down-regulation of their levels in nodulated plants. Plant Sci. 2016;245:119-27.10.1016/j.plantsci.2016.01.012Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[124] Jamil M, Kountche BA, Haider I, Guo X, Ntui VO, Jia K, et al. Methyl phenlactonoates are efficient strigolactone analogs with simple structure. J Exp Bot. 2018;69:2319-2331.10.1093/jxb/erx438Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[125] Tian MQ, Jiang K, Takahashi I, Li GD. Strigolactone-induced senescence of a bamboo leaf in the dark is alleviated by exogenous sugar. J Pestic Sci. 2018;43(3):173–179.10.1584/jpestics.D18-003Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[126] Ren CG, Kong CC, Xie ZH. Role of abscisic acid in strigolactone induced salt stress tolerance in arbuscular mycorrhizal Sesbania cannabina seedlings. BMC Plant Biology. 2018;18:74.10.1186/s12870-018-1292-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[127] Xu X, Fang P, Zhang H, Chi C, Song L, Xia1 X, et al. Strigolactones positively regulate defense against root-knot nematodes in tomato. J Exp Bot. 2018;70(4):1325-1337.10.1093/jxb/ery439Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[128] Rehman N, Ali M, Ahmad MZ, Guo L, Zhao J. Strigolactones promote rhizobia interaction and increase nodulation in soybean (Glycine max) Microb Pathog. 2017;114:420-430.10.1016/j.micpath.2017.11.049Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[129] Visentin I, Vitali M, Ferrero M, Zhang Y, Ruyter-Spira C, Novak O, et al. Low levels of strigolactones in roots as a component of the systemic signal of drought stress in tomato. New Phytologist. 2016;212:954–963.10.1111/nph.14190Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[130] Saeed W, Naseem S, Ali Z. Strigolactones Biosynthesis and Their Role in Abiotic Stress Resilience in Plants: A Critical Review Front Plant Sci. 2017;28(8):1487.10.3389/fpls.2017.01487Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[131] Lv S, Zhang Y, Li C, Liu Z, Yang N, Pan L, et al. Strigolactone-triggered stomatal closure requires hydrogen peroxide synthesis and nitric oxide production in an abscisic acid-independent manner. New Phytologist. 2018;217:290–304.10.1111/nph.14813Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[132] Stes E, Depuydt1 S, Keyser AD, Matthys C, Audenaert K, Yoneyama K, et al. Strigolactones as an auxiliary hormonal defence mechanism against leafy gall syndrome in Arabidopsis thaliana J Exp Bot. 2015;66(16):5123–5134.10.1093/jxb/erv309Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
© 2020 Mohammad Faizan, et al. published by De Gruyter
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
