Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Plant J. 2014 Oct 1;80(4):629–641. doi: 10.1111/tpj.12658

Figure 2. Genetic interactions between arf3-29 and wus-1, ag-1 and knu-1.

Figure 2

(a) WUS expression in a stage 6 arf3-29 flower as examined by in situ hybridization. No WUS signal was detected.

(b) WUS expression in ag-10 arf3-29 flowers as examined by in situ hybridization. Arrows indicate WUS signal, and numbers indicate the floral developmental stage.

(c) A wus-1 flower.

(d) An ag-10 arf3-29 wus-1 flower.

(e) An ag-1 flower.

(f) An ag-1 arf3-29 flower.

(g,h) Longitudinal sections through stage 9 ag-1 (g) and ag-1 arf3-29 (h) flowers. Arrows indicate the floral meristem.

(i) FM diameter of ag-1 and ag-1 arf3-29 flowers. The values indicate means ± SD (n=10). The mean values for ag-1 and ag-1 arf3-29 were significantly different according to a Student’s t-test (p<0.01).

(j) Siliques of ag-10 arf3-29 (left pair) and ag-10 arf3-29 knu-1 (right pair).

Bars: 50µm in (a,b) and (g,h); 1mm in (c–f,j).