PresentationPDF Available

Do plants talk to each other ?

Authors:

Abstract

In nature, plants live together in communities composed of one or more species that communicate through a variety of complex mechanisms (Curtis 1959). They secretly talk, trade and wage war against one another. They do this using a network of fungi that grow around and inside their roots named mycorrhiza (Babikova et al. 2013). Plants can detect the presence of their neighbors and modify their growth behavior accordingly. The groups of plants that are interlinked through a common mycorrhizal network are termed “guilds”. Klein et al (2016) showed that carbon assimilated by 40-meter tall spruce is traded over to neighboring beech, larch, and pine via overlapping root spheres. Plants can communicate through two different ways below ground and above ground, both of which will be discussed in the presentation.
Do plants talk to each
other ?
Do plants talk to each other ?
Speaker : Wassem Naguib
21046, (M.Sc. Plant Physiology)
Chairperson : Dr. Anjali Anand
Seminar Leader : Dr. Anjali Anand
How trees secretly talking to each
other ?
INTRODUCTION: TALKING, TRADING, WAGING WAR
Trees secretly talk, trade and wage war against one another. They do
this using a network of fungi that grow around and inside their
roots.
Babikova et al (2013) showed that mycorrhizal mycelia acts as a
conduit for signaling between plants, acting as an early warning
system for herbivore attack.
et al

INTRODUCTION: TALKING, TRADING, WAGING WAR
INTRODUCTION: TRADING
The groups of plants that are interlinked through a
common mycorrhizal network are termed as “guilds
Klein et al (2016) showed that carbon assimilated by
40-meter tall spruce is traded over to neighboring beech,
larch, and pine via overlapping root spheres.
et al 
 
Bidirectional root carbon transfer
between mature forest trees.
Estimation of the magnitude of the interspecific
root carbon exchange in the studied mixed
forest stand based on the observed δ13C values.
An isotope mixing ratio of 60% self and 40%
exchanged carbon between fine roots of labeled
and unlabeled trees satisfies the 13C signals in
both
INTRODUCTION: TRADING
Accounted for 40% of the fine root carbon (about 280 kilograms
per hectare per year tree-to-tree transfer).
et al 
 
INTRODUCTION: WAGING WAR
Example like many parasitic plants
Cuscuta spp !""
#"$
Orobanche ramose %&'
(&"(
$')**+++',-.&*'//'/'*
010 2(
(34.&
'
INTRODUCTION: TALKING
4et al&$
5
Shoot Root Root : Shoot
Pe
a
Oa
t
Oa
t
Oa
t
Oa
t
INTRODUCTION: TALKING
et al'

INTRODUCTION: TALKING
et al'

CASE STUDY 1
Study aim: To test whether aboveground plant-plant communication maybe detected
by neighbor plants through belowground interactions and trigger its acclimation
response
MATERIALS & METHODS
Root choice
test
Touch
treatment
MATERIALS & METHODS
Sharing
experiment
Transferring
experiment
RESULT: ROOT CHOICE TEST
Young maize grew more often
towards control solution
plants than towards stressed
solution.
"
"
&"

6

7  ("
UHPLC-MS analyses of root
exudates:
No significant differences in
metabolite composition of the
root exudates from treated and
control plants were detected
RESULT: TRANSFER EXPERIMENT
RESULT: SHARING EXPERIMENT
CONCLUSION
Below-ground plant-plant interactions showed that the
direction and extent of plant root responses to neighbors
can be affected by the above-ground physical stress to
which neighbors are exposed.
CASE STUDY 2
Study aim: To investigate whether winged and wingless M. persicae respond
differently to changes in volatile emissions of their hosts and hosts neighbors.
MATERIALS & METHODS
Plants and insects:
8Potato tubers and Onion bulbs placed
individually in plastic pots. 3 weeks
aged used for the exp.
8Adult winged and wingless
individuals of Myzus persicae
(Sulzer) derived from a stock culture
were grown on potted rapeseed plants.
Olfactory bioassays with plants
8Olfactometer instrument. ?
8Data were expressed as mean of individual aphid visits per olfactometer arm during
observation period.
Olfactory bioassays with chemicals
8Compared aphid olfactory responses to the synthetic blends ?by adding in 10-µl micro caps
to small pieces of filter paper, allowing them to evaporate for 30s.
8Test concentrations were 1/100, 1/10, 1, 10, and 100 times.
8Onion-exposed potatoes emit significantly more (E)-nerolidol and TMTT than unexposed
potatoes,
8Five concentrations (0.01,0.1,1,10, and 100 ng µl-1) used for treatment (Ninkovic et al. (2013)
MATERIALS & METHODS
MATERIALS & METHODS
Olfactometer instrument.
RESULT:
Olfactory responses of the aphids to odors from plants
RESULT:
Olfactory responses of the aphids to synthetic blends ?
RESULT:
Olfactory responses of the aphids to single volatile compounds
RESULT:
Olfactory responses of the aphids to single volatile compounds
CONCLUSION
Volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from onion plants induce
changes in the volatile emission
of neighboring potato plants with
a higher release of the terpenoids
TMTT and nerolidol. High doses
of these compounds repelled
winged aphids, while wingless
aphids were repelled by low
doses.
FUTURE PERSPECTIVE
Understanding the communication between the plants will
open a new world of novel innovations that can help our
community to get through many environmental challenges like
biological control to weeds, pests and some abiotic stresses.
In future, there is a possibility to mimic this communication
and invent some device to facilitate the mental communication
between plants, animals and humans.
THANK
YOU
9:;2
9:;2
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.