Plant grafting and its application in biological research

Yeoman M M, Brown R. Implacations of the formation of the graft union for organisation in the intact plant. Ann Bot, 1976, 40: 1265–1276 Yeoman M M, Kilpatrick D C, Miedzybrodzka M B, et al. Cellular interactions during graft formation in plants: A recognition phenomenon? Symp Soc Exp Biol, 1978, 32: 139–160 Kollmann R, Yang S, Glockmann R. Studies on graft unions II. Continuous and half plasmodesmata in different regions of the graft interface. Protoplasma, 1985, 126: 19–29 Moore R, Walker D B. Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. VI. Grafting of Sedum and Solanum callus tissue in vitro. Protoplasma, 1983, 115: 114–121 Moore R. Graft incompatibility between pear and quince: The influence of metabolites of Cydonia oblonga on suspension cultures of Pyrus communis. Am J Bot, 1986, 73: 1–4 Gebhardt K, Goldbach H. Establishment, graft union characteristics and growth of Prunus micrografts. Physiol Plant, 1988, 72: 153–159 Russo P, Slack S A. Tissue culture methods for the screening and analysis of putative virus-resistant transgenic potato plants. Phytopathology, 1998, 88: 437–441 Parkinson M, Yeoman M M. Graft formation in cultured, explanted internodes. New Phytol, 1982, 91: 711–719 Wang Y Q. Histologische, cytologische und transport-physiologische Untersuchungen an In-vitro-Pfropflingen unterschiedlicher Kompatibilität. Aachen: Shaker Press, 1992 Tsukaya N, Natio S, Rédei G P, et al. A new class of mutations in Arabidopsis thaliana, acaulisI, affecting the development of both inflorescences and leaves. Development, 1993, 118: 751–764 Turnbull C G N, Booker J P, Leyser H M O. Micrografting techniques for testing long-distance signaling in Arabidopsis. Plant J, 2002, 32: 255–262 Rhee S Y, Somerville C R. Flat-surface grafting in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol Biol Rep, 1995, 13: 118–123 Moore R. Physiological aspects of graft formation. In: Moore R, ed. Vegetative Compatibility Responses in Plants. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 1983. 89–105 McCully M E. Structural aspects of graft development. In: Moore R, ed. Vegetative Compatibility Responses in Plants. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 1983. 71–78 Tiedemann R. Graft union development and symplastic phloem contact in the heterograft Cucumis sativus on Cucurbita ficifolia. J Plant Physiol, 1989, 134: 427–440 Moore R, Walker D B. Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. I. A structural study of a compatible autograft in Sedum telephoides (Crassulaceae). Am J Bot, 1981, 68: 820–830 Stoddard F L, McCully M E. Histology of the development of the graft union in pea roots. Can J Bot, 1979, 57: 1486–1501 Kollmann R, Glockmann C. Studies on graft unions. I. Plasmodesmata between cells of plants belonging to different unrelated taxa. Protoplasma, 1985, 124: 224–235 Jeffree C E, Yeoman M M. Development of intercellular connection between opposing cells in a graft union. New Phytol, 1983, 93: 491–509 Wang Y, Kollmann R. Vascular differentiation in the graft union of in-vitro grafts with different compatibility-Structural and functional aspects. J Plant Physiol, 1996, 147: 521–533 Monzer J, Kollmann R. Vascular connections in the heterograft Lophophora williamsii Coult. on Trichocereus spachianus Rice. J Plant Physiol, 1986, 123: 359–372 Kollmann R, Glockmann C. Sieve elements of graft unions. In: Behnke H D, Sjolund R D, eds. Sieve Elements. Comparative Structure, Induction and Development. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer Press, 1990. 219–237 Deloire A, Hébant C. Peroxidase activity and lignification at the interface between stock and scion of compatible and incompatible grafts of Capsicum on Lycopersicum. Ann Bot, 1982, 49: 887–891 Gur A, Samish R M, Lifshitz E. The role of the cyanogenic glycoside of the quince in the incompatibility between pear cultivars and quince rootstocks. Hort Res, 1968, 8: 113–134 Roberts J R, Brown R. The development of the graft union. J Exp Bot, 1961, 12: 294–302 Moore R. Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. IV. The development of tensile strength in a compatible and incompatible graft. Am J Bot, 1983, 70: 226–231 Yang S, Xiang G, Zhang S, et al. Electrical resistance as a measure of graft union. J Plant Physiol, 1992, 141: 98–104 Turquois N, Malone M. Non-destructive assessment of developing hydraulic connections in the graft union of tomato. J Exp Bot, 1996, 47: 701–707 Fernández-García N, Carvajal M, Olmos E. Graft union formation in tomato plants: Peroxidase and catalase involvement. Ann Bot, 2004, 93: 53–60 Parkinson M, Jeffree C E, Yeoman M M. Incompatibility in cultured explantgrafts between members of’ the Solanaceae. New Phytol, 1987, 107: 489–498 De Stigter H C M. Parallelism between the transport of 14C-photosynthates and the flowering response in grafted Silene armeria L. Z Pflanzenphysiol, 1966, 55: 11–19 Rachow-Brandt G, Kollmann R. Studies on graft unions IV. Assimilate transport and sieve element restitution in homo- and heterografts. J Plant Physiol, 1992, 139: 579–583 Grignon N, Touraine B, Durand M. 6(5)Carboxyfluorescein as a tracer of phloem sap translocation. Am J Bot, 1989, 76: 871–877 Schöning U, Kollmann R. The function of phloem connections in regenerating in vitro-grafts. Bot Acta, 1994, 108: 56–62 Tiedemann R, Carstens-Behrens U. Influence of grafting on the phloem protein patterns in Cucurbitaceae I. Additional phloem exudate in Cucumis sativus grafted on two Cucurbita species. J Plant Physiol, 1994, 143: 189–194 Golecki B, Schulz A, Carstens-Behrens U, et al. Evidence for graft transmission of structural phloem proteins or their precursors in heterografts of Cucurbitaceae. Planta, 1998, 206: 630–640 Golecki B, Schulz A, Thompson G A. Translocation of structural P proteins in the phloem. Plant Cell, 1999, 11: 127–140 Yoo B C, Kragler F, Varkonyi-Gasic E, et al. A systemic small RNA signaling system in plants. Plant Cell, 2004, 16: 1979–2000 Xoconostle-Cázares B, Xiang Y, Ruiz-Medrano R, et al. Plant paralog to viral movement protein potentiates transport of mRNA into the phloem. Science, 1999, 283: 94–98 Ruiz-Medrano R, Xoconostle-Cázares B, Lucas W J. Phloem long-distance transport of CmNACP mRNA: Implications for supracellular regulation in plants. Development, 1999, 126: 4405–4419 Kim M, Caino W, Kessler S, et al. Developmental changes due to long-distance movement of homeobox fusion transcript in tomato. Science, 2001, 293: 287–289 Banerjee A K, Lin T, Hannapel D J. Untranslated regions of a mobile transcript RNA metabolism. Plant Physiol, 2009, 151: 1831–1843 Brodersen P, Voinnet O. The diversity of RNA silencing pathways in plants. Trends Genet, 2006, 22: 268–280 Pant B D, Buhtz A, Kehr J, et al. MicroRNA 399 is a long-distance signal for the regulation of plant phosphate homeostasis. Plant J, 2008, 53: 731–738 Martin A, Adam H, Díaz-Mendoza M, et al. Graft-transmissible induction of potato tuberization by the microRNA miR172. Development, 2009, 136: 2873–2881 Sunkar R, Zhu J K. Novel and stress-regulated microRNAs and other small RNAs from Arabidopsis. Plant Cell, 2004, 16: 2001–2019 Hsieh L C, Lin S I, Shih A C C, et al. Uncovering small RNA-mediated responses to phosphate deficiency in Arabidopsis by deep sequencing. Plant Physiol, 2009, 151: 2120–2132 Buhtz A, Pieritz J, Springer F, et al. Phloem small RNAs. Nutrient stress responses, and systemic mobility. BMC Plant Biol, 2010, 10: 64 Ryan C A, Pearce G. Systemin: A polypeptide signal for plant defensive genes. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol, 1998, 14: 1–7 McGurl B, Orozco-Cardenas M, Pearce G, et al. Overexpression of the prosystemin gene in transgenic tomato plants generates a systemic signal that constitutively induces proteinase inhibitor synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1994, 91: 9799–9802 Mouradov A, Cremer F, Coupland G. Control of flowering time: Interaction pathways as a basis for diversity. Plant Cell, 2002, 14: S111–S130 Lin M K, Belanger H, Lee Y J, et al. Flowering locus T protein may act as the long-distance florigenic signal in the Cucurbits. Plant Cell, 2007, 19: 1488–1506 Noaguchi M, Abe M, Kimura T, et al. Long-distance, graft-transmissible action of Arabidopsis FLOWERING LOCUS T protein to promote flowering. Plant Cell Physiol, 2008, 49: 1645–1658