-
Cytometry. Part a : the Journal of the... Jul 2008Since the first report on the flow cytometric study of plant material 35 years ago, analyzing the nuclear DNA content of field bean, an ever increasing number of... (Review)
Review
Since the first report on the flow cytometric study of plant material 35 years ago, analyzing the nuclear DNA content of field bean, an ever increasing number of applications of FCM has been developed and applied in plant science and industry, but a similar length of time elapsed before the appearance of the first complete volume devoted to FCM of plant cells. Most published information on the uses of FCM addresses various aspects of animal (including human) cell biology, thus failing to provide a pertinent substitute. FCM represents an ideal means for the analysis of both cells and subcellular particles, with a potentially large number of parameters analyzed both rapidly, simultaneously, and quantitatively, thereby furnishing statistically exploitable data and allowing for an accurate and facilitated detection of subpopulations. It is, indeed, the summation of these facts that has established FCM as an important, and sometimes essential, tool for the understanding of fundamental mechanisms and processes underlying plant growth, development, and function. In this review, special attention is paid to FCM as applied to plant cells in the context of plant breeding, and some new and less well-known uses of it for plants will be discussed.
Topics: Botany; Cell Nucleus; Crosses, Genetic; DNA, Plant; Equipment Design; Fabaceae; Flow Cytometry; Genotype; Immunophenotyping; Optics and Photonics; Plant Physiological Phenomena; Plants; Ploidies
PubMed: 18431774
DOI: 10.1002/cyto.a.20562 -
Trends in Plant Science Oct 2018Deep learning (DL), a subset of machine learning approaches, has emerged as a versatile tool to assimilate large amounts of heterogeneous data and provide reliable... (Review)
Review
Deep learning (DL), a subset of machine learning approaches, has emerged as a versatile tool to assimilate large amounts of heterogeneous data and provide reliable predictions of complex and uncertain phenomena. These tools are increasingly being used by the plant science community to make sense of the large datasets now regularly collected via high-throughput phenotyping and genotyping. We review recent work where DL principles have been utilized for digital image-based plant stress phenotyping. We provide a comparative assessment of DL tools against other existing techniques, with respect to decision accuracy, data size requirement, and applicability in various scenarios. Finally, we outline several avenues of research leveraging current and future DL tools in plant science.
Topics: Botany; Deep Learning; Phenotype; Plant Physiological Phenomena; Stress, Physiological
PubMed: 30104148
DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2018.07.004 -
Journal of Experimental Botany Jul 2018
Topics: Biotechnology; Botany; Climate Change; Epigenesis, Genetic; Plants; Publishing; Reproduction
PubMed: 29905802
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/ery218 -
Current Biology : CB Dec 2013
Topics: Botany; Environment; Humans; Plant Stomata; Research
PubMed: 24455770
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.10.065 -
Current Biology : CB Mar 2013
Topics: Botany; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Plant Physiological Phenomena; Plants; Pollination; Switzerland
PubMed: 23634443
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.01.038 -
Current Biology : CB Jan 2013
Topics: Botany; United Kingdom
PubMed: 23427342
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.11.033 -
Journal of Ethnobiology and... Feb 2017Ethnolinguistic studies are important for understanding an ethnic group's ideas on the world, expressed in its language. Comparing corresponding aspects of such... (Review)
Review
Ethnolinguistic studies are important for understanding an ethnic group's ideas on the world, expressed in its language. Comparing corresponding aspects of such knowledge might help clarify problems of origin for certain concepts and words, e.g. whether they form common heritage, have an independent origin, are borrowings, or calques. The current study was conducted on the material in Slavonic, Baltic, Germanic, Romance, Finno-Ugrian, Turkic and Albanian languages. The bear was chosen as being a large, dangerous animal, important in traditional culture, whose name is widely reflected in folk plant names. The phytonyms for comparison were mostly obtained from dictionaries and other publications, and supplemented with data from databases, the co-authors' field data, and archival sources (dialect and folklore materials). More than 1200 phytonym use records (combinations of a local name and a meaning) for 364 plant and fungal taxa were recorded to help find out the reasoning behind bear-nomination in various languages, as well as differences and similarities between the patterns among them. Among the most common taxa with bear-related phytonyms were Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng., Heracleum sphondylium L., Acanthus mollis L., and Allium ursinum L., with Latin loan translation contributing a high proportion of the phytonyms. Some plants have many and various bear-related phytonyms, while others have only one or two bear names. Features like form and/or surface generated the richest pool of names, while such features as colour seemed to provoke rather few associations with bears. The unevenness of bear phytonyms in the chosen languages was not related to the size of the language nor the present occurence of the Brown Bear in the region. However, this may, at least to certain extent, be related to the amount of the historical ethnolinguistic research done on the selected languages.
Topics: Animals; Asia; Culture; Ethnobotany; Europe; Language; Plants; Terminology as Topic; Ursidae
PubMed: 28222790
DOI: 10.1186/s13002-016-0132-9 -
American Journal of Botany Jan 2021The phrase "Darwin's abominable mystery" is frequently used with reference to a range of outstanding questions about the evolution of the plant group today known as the...
The phrase "Darwin's abominable mystery" is frequently used with reference to a range of outstanding questions about the evolution of the plant group today known as the angiosperms. Here, I seek to more fully understand what prompted Darwin to coin the phrase in 1879, and the meaning he attached to it, by surveying the systematics, paleobotanical records, and phylogenetic hypotheses of his time. In the light of this historical research, I argue that Darwin was referring to the origin only of a subset of what are today called angiosperms: a (now obsolete) group equivalent to the "dicotyledons" of the Hooker and Bentham system. To Darwin and his contemporaries, the dicotyledons' fossil record began abruptly and with great diversity in the Cretaceous, whereas the gymnosperms and monocotyledons were thought to have fossil records dating back to the Carboniferous or beyond. Based on their morphology, the dicotyledons were widely seen by botanists in Darwin's time (unlike today) as more similar to the gymnosperms than to the monocotyledons. Thus, morphology seemed to point to gymnosperm progenitors of dicotyledons, but this hypothesis made the monocotyledons, given their (at the time) apparently longer fossil record, difficult to place. Darwin had friendly disagreements about the mystery of the dicotyledons' abrupt appearance in the fossil record with others who thought that their evolution must have been more rapid than his own gradualism would allow. But the mystery may have been made "abominable" to him because it was seen by some contemporary paleobotanists, most notably William Carruthers, the Keeper of Botany at the British Museum, as evidence for divine intervention in the history of life. Subsequent developments in plant systematics and paleobotany after 1879 meant that Darwin's letter was widely understood to be referring to the abrupt appearance of all angiosperms when it was published in 1903, a meaning that has been attached to it ever since.
Topics: Biological Evolution; Botany; Fossils; History, 19th Century; Magnoliopsida; Male; Phylogeny
PubMed: 33482683
DOI: 10.1002/ajb2.1592 -
The New Phytologist May 2018
Topics: Botany; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Light; Plants
PubMed: 29658635
DOI: 10.1111/nph.15132 -
The New Phytologist Mar 2017
Topics: Awards and Prizes; Botany; Canada; Ecology; History, 21st Century
PubMed: 28164335
DOI: 10.1111/nph.14457