TY - JOUR
T1 - Defining senescence and death.
AU - Wagstaff, Carol
AU - Thomas, Howard
AU - Ougham, Helen J.
AU - Stead, Anthony J.
N1 - Thomas, Howard, Ougham, H. J., Wagstaff, C., Stead, A. J. (2003). Defining senescence and death. Journal of Experimental Botany, 54, (385), 1127-1132.
Sponsorship: BBSRC and DEFRA
PY - 2003/4
Y1 - 2003/4
N2 - This article evaluates features of leaf and ¯ower
senescence that are shared with, or are different
from, those of other terminal events in plant development.
Alterations of plastid structure and function in
senescence are often reversible and it is argued that
such changes represent a process of transdifferentiation
or metaplasia rather than deterioration. It may
be that the irreversible senescence of many ¯owers
and some leaves represents the loss of ancestral
plasticity during evolution. Reversibility serves to
distinguish senescence fundamentally from programmed
cell death (PCD), as does the fact that
viability is essential for the initiation and progress of
cell senescence. Senescence (particularly its timing
and location) requires new gene transcription, but
the syndrome is also subject to signi®cant posttranscriptional
and post-translational regulation. The
reversibility of senescence must relate to the plastic,
facultative nature of underlying molecular controls.
Senescence appears to be cell-autonomous, though
de®nitive evidence is required to substantiate this.
The vacuole plays at least three key roles in the
development of senescing cells: it defends the cell
against biotic and abiotic damage, thus preserving
viability, it accumulates metabolites with other functions,
such as animal attractants, and it terminates
senescence by becoming autolytic and facilitating
true cell death. The mechanisms of PCD in plants
bear a certain relation to those of apoptosis, and
some processes, such as nucleic acid degradation,
are super®cially similar to aspects of the senescence
syndrome. It is concluded that, in terms of physiological
components and their controls, senescence
and PCD are at best only distantly related.
AB - This article evaluates features of leaf and ¯ower
senescence that are shared with, or are different
from, those of other terminal events in plant development.
Alterations of plastid structure and function in
senescence are often reversible and it is argued that
such changes represent a process of transdifferentiation
or metaplasia rather than deterioration. It may
be that the irreversible senescence of many ¯owers
and some leaves represents the loss of ancestral
plasticity during evolution. Reversibility serves to
distinguish senescence fundamentally from programmed
cell death (PCD), as does the fact that
viability is essential for the initiation and progress of
cell senescence. Senescence (particularly its timing
and location) requires new gene transcription, but
the syndrome is also subject to signi®cant posttranscriptional
and post-translational regulation. The
reversibility of senescence must relate to the plastic,
facultative nature of underlying molecular controls.
Senescence appears to be cell-autonomous, though
de®nitive evidence is required to substantiate this.
The vacuole plays at least three key roles in the
development of senescing cells: it defends the cell
against biotic and abiotic damage, thus preserving
viability, it accumulates metabolites with other functions,
such as animal attractants, and it terminates
senescence by becoming autolytic and facilitating
true cell death. The mechanisms of PCD in plants
bear a certain relation to those of apoptosis, and
some processes, such as nucleic acid degradation,
are super®cially similar to aspects of the senescence
syndrome. It is concluded that, in terms of physiological
components and their controls, senescence
and PCD are at best only distantly related.
U2 - 10.1093/jxb/erg133
DO - 10.1093/jxb/erg133
M3 - Article
SN - 1460-2431
VL - 54
SP - 1127
EP - 1132
JO - Journal of Experimental Botany
JF - Journal of Experimental Botany
IS - 385
ER -