Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:41:50.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of DCPA on Ultrastructure of Foxtail Millet Cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

C. T. Chang  and
Don Smith
C. T. Chang
Affiliation:
Dep. of Biol. Sci., North Texas State Univ., Denton, Texas 76203
Don Smith
Affiliation:
Dep. of Biol. Sci., North Texas State Univ., Denton, Texas 76203
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Shoot apices of 7-day old foxtail millet (Setaria italica (L) Beauv.) seedlings treated with 2 and 20 mg/L of dimethyltetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA) were examined under the electron microscope. Cell division is interrupted. The nucleus and nucleolus do not disintegrate and chromosomes do not differentiate. Instead, giant nuclei and giant nucleoli occupy most of the cell volume in the meristematic regions. Several nucleolar caps form on the giant nucleolus; and in the advanced stages, they separate and are encircled by a nuclear membrane to form multiple nuclei. Other organelles are also affected. Cristae and thylakoid membranes of mitochondria and chloroplasts degenerate and multiple vacuoles form. Cell walls are markedly more osmophilic after DCPA treatment. Treated cells are less turgid than controls.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , May 1972 , pp. 220 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Bernhard, W. 1966. Ultrastructural aspects of the normal and pathological nucleolus in mammalian cells. Nat. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 23:13–38.Google ScholarPubMed
2. Bernhard, W. and Granber, N. 1969. Electron microscopy of the nucleolus in vertebrate cells, p. 81–149. In Dalton, A. J. and Haguenan, F. (ed.), Ultrastructure in biological systems. Vol. 3. The Nucleus, Academic Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
3. Bingham, S. W. 1967. Influence of herbicides on root development of bermudagrass. Weed Sci. 15:363–365.Google Scholar
4. Bingham, S. W. 1968. Effect of DCPA on anatomy and cytology of roots. Weed Sci. 16:449–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Ching, T. M. 1970. Glyoxysomes in megagametophyte of germinating ponderosa pine seeds. Plant Physiol. 46:475–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Chouinard, L. A. 1966. Nucleolar architecture in root meristemic cells of Allium cepa . Nat. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 23:125–135.Google Scholar
7. Crafts, A. S. 1961. The chemistry and mode of action of herbicides. Interscience Publishers, New York. 269 p.Google Scholar
8. Harada, Y. N., Sunagawa, , and Katacigia, K. 1968. Segregation of the nucleolar materials produced by quinoxaline antibiotics in JTC-13 cells-Comparison of effects among 4-nitroquinoline 1-oxide, Actinomycin-B, and quinoxaline antibiotics. Gann (Jap. J. Cancer Res.) 59:513–522.Google Scholar
9. Heine, U., Langlois, A. J., and Beard, J. W. 1966. Ultrastructural alterations in avian leukemic myeloblasts exposed to actinomycin in vitro. Cancer Res. 26:1847–1858.Google Scholar
10. Hyde, B. B. 1966. Changes in nucleolar ultrastructure associated with differentiation in the root apex. Nat. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 23:39–52.Google ScholarPubMed
11. Lafontaine, J. G. 1969. Structural components of the nucleus in mitotic plant cells, p. 151–196. In Dalton, A. J. and Haguenan, F. (ed.), Ultrastructure in biological systems. Vol. 3. The Nucleus, Academic Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
12. Lonzo, G. P., and Lonzo, C. P. 1970. The development of glyoxysomes in maize scutellum. Plant Physiol. 46:599–604.Google Scholar
13. Montgomery, P. O'B., Reynolds, R. C., and McClendon, D. E. 1965. Nucleolar “caps” induced by flying spot ultraviolet nuclear irradiation. Amer. J. Pathol. 43:555–567.Google Scholar
14. Reich, E. 1964. Actinomycin. Correlation of structure and function of its complexes with purines and DNA. Science. 143:684–689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Reynolds, R. C., Montgomery, P. O'B., and Hughes, G. 1964. Nucleolar “caps” produced by actinomycin D. Cancer Res. 24:1269–1277.Google ScholarPubMed
16. Reynolds, R. C., Montgomery, P. O'B., and Karney, D. 1963. Nucleolar “caps”—a morphologic entity produced by the carcinogen 4-nitroquinoline N-oxide. Cancer Res. 23:535–538.Google Scholar
17. Schoefl, G. I. 1964. The effect of actinomycin D on the fine structure of the nucleolus. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 10:224–243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Schultz, D. P., Funderburk, H. H. Jr., and Negi, N. S. 1968. Effect of trifluralin on growth, morphology, and nucleic acid synthesis. Plant Physiol. 43:265–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Smuckler, E. A. and Benditt, E. P. 1965. The early effects of actinomycin on rat liver. Change in ribosomes and polysomes. Lab. Invest. 14:1699–1709.Google ScholarPubMed
20. Swift, H. 1959. Studies on nucleolar function, p. 266–303. In Zirkler, R. E. (ed.), A symposium on molecular biology, University Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
21. Swift, Hewson, and Stevens, B. J. Nucleolar-chromosomal interaction in microorganisms of maize. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 23:145–166.Google Scholar
22. Valdovinos, J. G., Jensen, T. E., and Sicko, L. M. 1971. Ethylene-induced rough endoplasmic reticula in abscission cells. Plant Physiol. 47:162–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed