Abstract
Plants have at least three kinds of propagating electrical signals. In addition to a sustained wound potential (WP) that stops a few millimeters from dying cells, these signals are action potentials (APs) and slow wave potentials (SWPs). All three signals consist of a transient change in the membrane potential of plant cells (depolarization and subsequent repolarization), but only SWPs and APs make use of the vascular bundles to achieve a potentially systemic spread through the entire plant. The principal difference used to differentiate SWPs from APs is that SWPs show longer, delayed repolarizations. Unfortunately, SWP repolarizations also show a large range of variation that makes a distinction difficult. SWPs and APs do differ more clearly, however, in the causal factors stimulating their appearance, the ionic mechanisms of their depolarization and repolarization phases as well as the mechanisms and pathways of propagation. The depolarizations of a SWP arise with an increase in turgor pressure cells experience in the wake of a hydraulic pressure wave that spreads through the xylem conduits after rain, embolism, bending, local wounds, organ excision and local burning. The generation of APs occurs under different environmental and internal influences (e.g. touch, light changes, cold treatment, cell expansion) that — mediated through varying generator potentials — trigger a voltage-dependent depolarization spike in an all-or-nothing manner. While APs and WPs can be triggered in excised organs, SWPs depend on the pressure difference between the atmosphere and an intact plant interior. High humidity and prolonged darkness will also suppress SWP signaling. The ionic mechanism of the SWP is thought to involve a transient shutdown of a P-type H+-ATPase in the plasma membrane and differs from the mechanism underlying APs. Another defining characteristic of SWPs is the hydraulic mode of propagation that enables them — but not APs — to pass through killed or poisoned areas. Unlike APs they can easily communicate between leaf and stem. SWPs can move in both directions of the plant axis, while their amplitudes show a decrement of about 2.5% cm−1 and move with speeds that can be slower than APs in darkness and faster in bright light. The SWPs move with a rapid pressure increase that establishes an axial pressure gradient in the xylem. This gradient translates distance (perhaps via changing kinetics in the rise of turgor pressure) into increasing lag phases for the pressure-induced depolarizations in the epidermis cells. Haberlandt (1890), after studying propagating responses in Mimosa pudica, suggested the existence of hydraulically propagated electric potentials at a time when only APs were conceivable. It took a century to realize that such signals do exist and that they coincide with the characteristics of SWPs rather than those of APs. Moreover, we begin to understand that SWPs are not only ubiquitous among higher plants but represent a unique, defining characteristic without parallels in lower plants or animals.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Alarcon J-J, Malone M (1994) Substantial hydraulic signals are triggered by leaf-biting insects in tomato. J Exp Bot 45:953–957
Boari F, Malone M (1993) Rapid and systemic hydraulic signals are induced by localized wounding in a wide range of species. J Exp Bot 44:741–746
Burdon-Sanderson J (1873) Note on the electrical phenomena which accompany irritation of the leaf of Dionea muscipula in the excited and unexcited states. Proc R Soc Lond 21:491–496
Canny MJ (1995) Apoplastic water and solute movement: new rules for an old space. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Molec Biol 46:215–236
Cheeseman JM, Pickard BG (1977) Depolarization of cell membranes in leaves of Lycopersicon by extract containing Ricca’s factor. Can J Bot 55:511–519
Davies E, Zawadzki T, Witters D (1991) Electrical activity and signal transmission in plants: how do plants know? In: Penelk C, Greppin H (eds) Plant signaling, plasma membrane and change of state. University of Geneva, Switzerland, pp 119–137
Dziubinska H, Trebasz K, Zawadzki T (2001) Transmission route for action potentials and variation potentials in Helianthus annuus L. J Plant Physiol 158:1167–1172
Fromm J, Bauer T (1994) Action potentials in maize sieve tubes change phloem translocation. J Exp Bot 273:463–469
Fromm J, Eschrich W (1988) Transport processes in stimulated and non-stimulated leaves of Mimosa pudica. Trees 2:7–24
Gunar II, Sinykhin AM (1962) A spreading wave of excitation in higher plants. Proc Acad Sci USSR (Botany) 142:214–215
Gunar II, Sinykhin AM (1963) Functional significance of action currents affecting the gas exchange of higher plants. Sov Plant Physiol 10:219–226
Green TR, Ryan CA (1972) Wound-induced proteinase inhibitor in plant leaves: a possible defense mechanism against insects. Science 175:776–777
Gronewald JW, Hansen JB (1980) Sensitivity of proton and ion transport mechanisms of corn roots injury to injury. Plant Sci Lett 18:143–150
Haberlandt G (1890) Das reizleitende Gewebesystem der Sinnpflanze. Thieme, Leipzig
Herde O, Fuss H, Pena-Cortes H, Fisahn J (1995) Proteinase inhibitor II gene expression induced by electrical stimulation and control of photosynthetic activity in tomato plants. Plant Cell Physiol 36:737–742
Herde O, Atzorn R, Fisahn J, Wasternak C, Willmitzer L, Pena-Cortes H (1996) Localized wounding by heat initiates the accumulation of proteinase inhibitor II in abscisic acid deficient tomato plants by triggering jasmonic acid biosynthesis. Plant Physiol 112:853–860
Herde O, Fuss H, Pena-Cortes H, Willmitzer L, Fisahn J (1998) Remote stimulation by heat induces characteristic membrane-potential responses in the veins of wild-type and abscisic acid-deficient tomato plants. Planta 206:146–153
Houwinck AL (1935) The conduction of excitation in Mimosa pudica. Rec Trav Bot Neerl 32:51–91
Julien JL, Desbiez MO, de Jaeger G, Frachisse JM (1991) Characteristics of the wave of depolarization induced by wounding in Bidens pilosa L. J Exp Bot 42:131–137
Kinraide TB, Wyse RE (1986) Electrical evidence for turgor inhibition of proton extrusion in sugar beet taproots. Plant Physiol 82:1148–1150
Koopowitz H, Dhyse R, Fosket DE (1975) Cell membrane potentials of higher plants: changes induced by wounding. J Exp Bot 26:131–137
Koziolek C, Grams TE, Schreiber U, Matyssek R, Fromm J (2003) Transient knockout of photosynthesis mediated by electrical signals. New Phytol 161:715–722
Malone M (1992) Kinetics of wound-induced hydraulic signals and variation potentials in wheat seedlings. Planta 187:505–510
Malone M (1996) Rapid, long-distance signal transmission in higher plants. Adv Bot Res 22:163–228
Malone M, Stankovic B (1991) Surface potentials and hydraulic signals in wheat leaves following localized wounding by heat. Plant Cell Environ 14:431–436
Malone M, Palumbo L, Boari F, Monteleone M, Jones HG (1994) The relationship between wound-induced proteinase inhibitors and hydraulic signals in tomato seedlings. Plant Cell Environ 17:81–87
Mancuso S (1999) Hydraulic and electrical transmission of wound-induced signals in Vitis vinifera. Aust J Plant Physiol 26:55–61
Mertz SM, Higinbotham N (1976) Transmembrane electropotentials in barley roots as related to cell type, cell location, and cutting and aging effects. Plant Physiol 57:123–128
Okamoto H (1955) On the distribution of electric potential in the seedling of Vigna sesquipedalis and its change by light stimulation. Bot Mag (Tokyo) 68:1–15
Opritov VA (1978) Propagating excitation and assimilate transport in the phloem. Sov Plant Physiol 25:1042–1048
Opritov VA, Pyatygin SS, Vodeneev VA (2002) Direct coupling of action potential generation in cells of a higher plant (Cucurbita pepo) with the operation of an electrogenic pump. Russ J Plant Physiol. 49:142–147
Palmgren MG (1998) Proton gradients and plant growth: role of the plasma membrane H+-ATPase. Adv Bot Res 28:1–70
Pena-Cortes H, Fisahn J, Wilmitzer L (1995) Signals involved in wound-induced proteinase inhibitor II gene expression in tomato and potato plants. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 92:4106–4113
Pickard BG (1973) Action potentials in higher plants. Bot Rev 39:172–201
Rhodes JD, Thain JF, Wildon DC (1996) The pathway for systemic electrical signal conduction in the wounded tomato plant. Planta 200:50–57
Ricca U (1916) Soluzione d’un problema di fisiologia: la propagazione di stimulo nella Mimosa. Nuovo G Bot Ital 23:51–170
Roblin G (1985) Analysis of the variation potential induced by wounding in plants. Plant Cell Physiol 26:455–461
Roblin G, Bonnemain J-L (1985) Propagation in Vicia faba stem of a potential variation by wounding. Plant Cell Physiol 26:1273–1283
Schildknecht H (1984) Turgorins — new chemical messengers for plant behavior. Endeav NS 8:113–117
Sibaoka T (1953) Some aspects of the slow conduction of stimuli in the leaf of Mimosa pudica. Sci Rep Tohoku Univ 20:72–88
Sibaoka T (1969) Physiology of rapid movements in higher plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 20:165–184
Sibaoka T (1991) Rapid plant movements triggered by action potentials. Bot Mag (Tokyo) 104:73–95
Sibaoka T (1997) Application of leaf extract causes repetitive action potentials in Biophytum sensitivum. J Plant Res 110:485–487
Shimmen T (2001) Electrical perception of “death message” in Chara: involvement of turgor pressure. Plant Cell Physiol 42:366–373
Sinyukhin AM, Britikov EA (1967) Action potentials in the reproductive system of plants. Nature 215:1278–1280
Spanjers AW (1981) Biolelectric potential changes in the style of Lilium longiflorum Thunb. after self-and cross-pollination of the stigma. Planta 153:1–5
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1992) Rapid alteration in growth rate and electric potentials upon stem excision in pea seedlings. Planta 187:523–531
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1994) Comparison of electric and growth responses to excision in in cucumber and pea seedlings. I. Short-distance effects are due to wounding. Plant Cell Environ 18:33–41
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1995) Comparison of electric and growth responses to excision in cucumber and pea seedlings. II. Long-distance effects are due to hydraulic signals. Plant Cell Environ 18:33–41
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1996) Induction and ionic basis of slow wave potentials in seedlings of Pisum sativum L. Planta 200:416–425
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1997a) The propagation of slow wave potentials in pea epicotyls. Plant Physiol 113:209–217
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1997b) Mannitol inhibits growth of intact cucumber but not pea seedlings by mechanically collapsing the root pressure. Plant Cell Environm 20:1135–1144
Stahlberg R, Cosgrove DJ (1997c) Slow wave potentials in cucumber differ in form and growth effect from those in pea seedlings. Physiol Plant 101:379–388
Stahlberg R, Cleland RE, Van Volkenburgh E (2005a) Propagating electrical signals can be induced by environmental stimuli. Abstracts of the American Society of Plant Biologists
Stahlberg R, Cleland RE, Van Volkenburgh E (2005b). Decrement and amplification of slow wave potentials during their propagation in Helianthus annuus L. shoots. Planta 220:550–558
Stankovic B, Davies E (1996) Both action potentials and variation potentials induce proteinase inhibitor gene expression in tomato. FEBS Lett 390:275–279
Stankovic B, Davies E (1998) The wound response in tomato involves rapid growth and electric responses, systemically up-regulated transcription of proteinase inhibitor and calmodulin and down-regulated translation. Plant Cell Physiol 39:268–274
Stankovic B, Zawadzki T, Davies E (1997) Characterization of the variation potential in sunflower. Plant Physiol 115:1083–1088
Stankovic B, Witters DL, Zawadzki T, Davies E (1998) Action and variation potentials in sunflower: an analysis of their relationship and distinguishing characteristics. Physiol Plant 103:51–58
Theilet C, Delpeyroux F, Fiszman M, Reigner P, Esnault R (1982) Influence of excision shock on on the protein metabolism of Vicia faba L. meristematic root cells. Planta 155:478–485
Tinz-Fuchtmeyer A, Gradmann D (1990) Laser-interferometric re-examination of rapid conductance of excitation in Mimosa pudica. J Exp Bot 41:15–19
Tsaplev YB, Zatsepina GN (1980) The electrical nature of the propagation of the variation potential in Tradescantia. Biofizika 25:723–728
Umrath K (1959) Der Erregungsvorgang. In: Ruhland W (ed) Handbuch der Pflanzenphysiologie, vol 17. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 24–110
Van Sambeek JW, Pickard BG (1976) Mediation of rapid electrical, metabolic, transpirational and photosynthetic changes by factors released from wounds. Can J Bot 54:2662–2671
Volkov AG, Haak RA (1995) Bioelectrochemical signals in potato plants. Russ J Plant Physiol 42:17–23
Westgate ME, Steudle E (1985) Water transport in the midrib of tissue of maize leaves. Direct measurement of the propagation of changes in cell turgor across a plant tissue. Plant Physiol 78:183–191
Wildon DC, Thain JF, Minchin PEH, Gubb IR Reilly AJ, Skipper YD, Doherty HM, O’Donnell PJ, Bowles DJ (1992) Electrical signaling and systemic proteinase inhibitor induction in the wounded plant. Nature 360:62–65
Zawadzki T, Davies E, Dziubinska H, Trebasz K (1991) Characteristics of action potentials in Helianthus annuus. Physiol Plant 83:601–604
Zerrenthin U, Stahlberg R (1981) Die Nutzung der bioelektrischen Kurzzeitreaktion auf mechanische Reizung zur Ermittlung von Kennwerten und Sortenunterschioeden bei Getreidekeimpflanzen. Arch Acker-Pflanzenbau und Boden 25:197–203
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stahlberg, R., Cleland, R.E., Van Volkenburgh, E. (2006). Slow Wave Potentials — a Propagating Electrical Signal Unique to Higher Plants. In: Baluška, F., Mancuso, S., Volkmann, D. (eds) Communication in Plants. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28516-8_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28516-8_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-28475-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-28516-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)