Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T21:06:19.454Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2023

Wouter Smet
Affiliation:
Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE) Division, Plant Cell and Developmental Biology, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ikram Blilou*
Affiliation:
Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE) Division, Plant Cell and Developmental Biology, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
*
Corresponding author: Ikram Blilou; Email: ikram.blilou@kaust.edu.sa

Abstract

In the Arabidopsis root, growth is sustained by the meristem. Signalling from organiser cells, also termed the quiescent centre (QC), is essential for the maintenance and replenishment of the stem cells. Here, we highlight three publications from the founder of the concept of the stem cell niche in Arabidopsis and a pioneer in unravelling regulatory modules governing stem cell specification and maintenance, as well as tissue patterning in the root meristem: Ben Scheres. His research has tremendously impacted the plant field. We have selected three publications from the Scheres legacy, which can be considered a breakthrough in the field of plant developmental biology. van den Berg et al. (1995) and van den Berg et al. (1997) uncovered that positional information-directed patterning. Sabatini et al. (1999), discovered that auxin maxima determine tissue patterning and polarity. We describe how simple but elegant experimental designs have provided the foundation of our current understanding of the functioning of the root meristem.

Information

Type
Classics
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with John Innes Centre
Figure 0

Figure 1. Anatomy of the root apical meristem and pathways involved in patterning and specification of the root apical meristem. A. Detailed overview of the different cell types within the root apical meristem. B. Auxin transport and the underlying PLETHORA gradient. Arrows indicate the direction of the auxin flux directed by the PINproteins corresponding to the colors in the legend. The PLETHORA gradient is represented by the white-blue gradient. Strongest expression is found in the QC and surrounding stem cells and decreases further away from the stem cells.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Model describing the findings of van den Berg et al. 1995 and 1997 showing the effect of laser ablation on patterning of the surrounding cells in the stem cell niche. A. Sequence of divisions from the cortex endodermal initial that generate the cortex and endodermis in normal conditions. B. Ablation of the cortex endodermal initial cell leads to its cell death and the cell will be compressed. It will be replaced by a cell from the vasculature but this does not affect the sequence of division of the overlaying cells. C. Ablation of the cortex endodermal daughter cell leads to its cell death and the cell will be compressed. It will be replaced by a cell from the vasculature but this does not affect the sequence of division of underlying cells. D. Ablation of three cortex endodermal daughter cells overlaying the initial cell. The underlying initial cell now undergoes anticlinal division but fails to undergo the subsequent periclinal division that normally results in the formation of both cortex and endodermis. E. Root apical meristem upon ablation of one QC cell. White arrows indicate the non-cell autonomous inhibition of differentiation by the QC on the surrounding stem cells. F. After laser ablation of one QC cell the contacting columella stem cells differentiate, marked by the formation of starch granules. Also, the contacting cortex endodermal initial undergoes periclinal division.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Model describing the findings in Sabatini et al. 1999. A. Scheme above showing the anatomy of a wild-type Arabidopsis root, Scheme below depicting a subset of cells of the QC, Vasculature, Columella stem cells and differentiated columella cells B. Scheme above showing the Auxin maxima found in the distal root tip using the DR5::GUS reporter, Scheme below showing auxin maxima in the same subset of cells as in A. C. Above scheme shows treatment with NPA expands the localization of the auxin maxima in the Arabidopsis root tip, below schemes showing the auxin redistribution and tissue repatterning. D. Above scheme showing the shifts of the auxin maxima in the distal root tip shifts upon laser ablation of the QC, Schemes below showing the correlation of the shift of the auxin maxima with the QC respecification and columella stem cell after ablation.

Figure 3

Figure 4. A spatial overview of the molecular players within the RAM involved in patterning and stem cell specification. Solid black arrows indicate transcriptional regulation. Dashed arrows indicate protein movement.

Author comment: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R0/PR1

Comments

Dear Olivier,

Please find in the upload our review draft entitled “ A blast from the past: understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation” by Smet and Blilou. This review is written upon your invitation, and it discusses three papers that, in our opinion, have contributed to major understanding in stem cell specification and maintenance in the Arabidopsis root meristems. We reviewed the following publications: Cell fate in the Arabidopsis root meristem is determined by directional signaling (van den Berg et al., 1995); Short-range control of cell differentiation in the Arabidopsis root meristem (van den Berg et al., 1997); An Auxin-Dependent Distal Organizer of Pattern and Polarity in the Arabidopsis Root (Sabatini et al., 1999).

We describe how simple experimental designs can pave the way toward a major understanding of a biological process.

We greatly appreciate your time and consideration and look forward to your response.

Sincerely Yours,

Ikram Blilou,

Review: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

Not competing interests

Comments

This reviewer does not believe that the concept underlying a review should be to serve as a tribute or recognition of merits, even though, the scientist being acknowledged here has greatly contributed to the understanding of stem cells and cell fate specification in plants. I would recommend using a different format.

Major comments:

- The organization and development of the review is too specific and cannot be considered to be of interest to a broad audience

- The review is not incisive enough and does not fully integrate a current perspective of our understanding of stem cell specification in plants. The most recent achievements and advances on stem cell and quiescent center specification (and/or regeneration) are not referenced. Do the authors not consider Ben Scheres still impacts nowadays? I would say he does.

- The review as a whole lacks quite novelty and does not provide very new ideas or perspectives. In addition, the figure is almost the same as we have seen in many other publications and does not illustrate well the text.

Review: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

I have no competing interests

Comments

This review describes legacy of Ben Scheres, a plant developmental biologist who made important contributions to understanding the root apical meristem. This review takes a unique approach by focusing primarily on three papers that highlight Ben Scheres’ scientific legacy, thereby provides an interesting and informative perspective on seminal work in the field of plant development. In addition, the review connects this work to the broader literature on the stem cell niche, including manuscripts that have built new knowledge based on these initial publications.

I have several minor comments to further improve the paper:

1) Figures: Both figures are very small. In the version of the document I have, there are two figures shown, but only one has a legend. I think it would be helpful to explicitly show how each paper contributed to the knowledge depicted in each figure. For example, it might tie into the review better to have three figures – each to highlight the major conclusions one of the three main papers.

2) Paragraphs: There are a number of very short paragraphs throughout the document (for example, Line 94, Line 134, Line 205, Line 208, etc). In my opinion, these statements would be stronger if they were woven into the more descriptive paragraphs.

3) Organization: It is not clear based on the headings where the authors stop describing the Scheres papers and where they start describing subsequent work that builds off these seminal manuscripts. This is partly because each paper has a different number of subsections, some of which are clearly labeled, and some of which are not. For example, the first paper has two clearly labeled subsections. But the third paper only has one section, although there are 2 additional sections that describe the third paper. This is followed by two more sections that are broader in scope. I recommend reorganizing the last sections in the review to make it clear what is a subsection of the Scheres work and what is a more encompassing literature review.

4) Line 374: “Special omics” – do you mean spatial ‘omics?

5) Line 41: In order to avoid ending the sentence in a preposition, I’d recommend changing to something along the lines of: “Because of its highly stereotyped organization, Arabidopsis root tissue can be easily recognized and traced back to the stem cells of origin.”

6) There are a few grammar issues, particularly with missing spaces between words and parentheses (for example, Lines 121 and 224).

Recommendation: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R0/PR4

Comments

The editor has carefully considered the reviewer’s comments and agrees with both that the scientist’s contributions to stem cell and cell fate specification in plants are significant. However, they suggest that a different format and a more focused approach on a broader audience could enhance the review’s impact. The reviewers also recommend integrating recent advances in the field and providing new perspectives to increase the review’s novelty, while acknowledging the continued impact of the scientist’s work. Furthermore, the reviewers note minor issues with the figures, which could be improved by explicitly showing each paper’s contribution to the depicted knowledge, and suggest weaving short paragraphs into more descriptive ones for greater impact. The organization could also be clearer in distinguishing between subsections of the Scheres work and a more encompassing literature review. Lastly, grammar issues should be addressed.

Decision: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R1/PR6

Comments

Dear Editors,

Please find in the upload the revised version of the classic review entitled “ A blast from the past: understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation”.

We thank the editors and the reviewers for their constructive comments that have helped shape the review and improve its quality.

We have implemented the following changes.

1- We have included figures highlighting the key findings from each classical paper

2- We are also including a response to each point raised by the reviewers.

We thank you for this opportunity and look forward to your response

Review: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R1/PR7

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

After reading the new version of the article, the other review, and the response to the reviewers, I only have a few very minor comments.

1) The first figure that is shown in the PDF is very difficult to interpret on its own (no figure caption and very limited labeling). I’m not sure what type of figure this is supposed to be, because it is not described in the text. If it is a graphical abstract, my suggestion would be to design one that has a real root image in it - Figure 1B would be a better option.

2) There are a few typos, for example on Line 46, 315, and 331.

Review: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R1/PR8

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

The authors have addressed most of the concerned raised and in this reviewer´s opinion the manuscript is more solid and interesting. Still there are some issues that need to be addressed:

- In the abstract the citation “van den Berg et al., 1995/7” is confusing, I would recommend “ 1995 and 1997” or any other way that quickly shows there are two references (not just one).

- In the section “Directional signaling defines cell fate in the root meristem” one of the authors is coauthor of a Science paper in 2015 (together with Ben Scheres) that deals with the integration of directional signaling into cell lineages (through endogenous factors). In addition to the paper by Marhava et al 2019 (which is very appropriate), please also add this reference to include the general idea of this mechanism related to positional information.

- line 144, do the authors maybe refer to cells outside the meristem?

- line 242 (or that paragraph), it would be appropriate to cite the paper by Grieneisen et al 2007 as the model the integrates the outcome of the different auxin transporters in the root meristem and which maintains the auxin maxima driving PLT expression as developed by Mahonen et al., 2014 (notwithstanding that the authors comment this paper in another section of the manuscript)

- line 313, the reference by Sozanni et al., 2010 is not included in the list of references. Please cite this paper appropriately.

- line 382, please explain why the publication by Berckmans et al 2020 challenged this “view”?

Finally, I would like to draw the authors´ attention to their comment about highlighting the contributions of Dr. Benfey.I do not really understand what is to do between this review and writing a “similar” manuscript related to Dr. Benfey. Not only the authors might not be guessing well who I am…but even for the “proper target” I find this comment questionable and not much respectful of the work of a reviewer who is just critically reading what the authors have written (not what they might have written, wanted to write or will write in the future…)

Recommendation: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R1/PR9

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R1/PR10

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R2/PR11

Comments

Dear Olivier,

Thank you for the acceptance of our review.

Please find in the upload the second revision of the review with all the comments and reviewer’s suggestions implemented.

With best wishes,

Ikram

Recommendation: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R2/PR12

Comments

Thank you for your review, and thank you for your understanding for any delay during the review process.

Best,

Ross Sozzani

Decision: A blast from the past: Understanding stem cell specification in plant roots using laser ablation — R2/PR13

Comments

No accompanying comment.