Images of stomata

lily leaf lower epidermis

Images of stomata

Anonymous (x)

In Biol 2043 – Biodiversity of Plants and Algae – 1999 – Lab Images –

http://plato.acadiau.ca/courses/biol/kristie/biol2043/

boston ivy lower epidermis
Advertisements

Stomata in Quercus

Scanning electron micrograph (sem) of an oak leaf stoma (Quercus robur). Stomata are pores that open and close in order to regulate gas exchange in a plant. A stoma comprises a pore, the aperture of which is controlled by a pair of specialised cells known as guard cells. These cells swell to close the pore and shrink to open it. Stomata are found mainly on the underside of leaves. This micrograph also clearly shows the wax platelets that cover the leaves. Magnification x7360 (x1811 at 10cm wide)

Oak Leaf Stoma (Quercus robur)

Power and Syred (2016)

In Fineartamerica –

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/1-oak-leaf-stoma-quercus-robur-power-and-syred.html

Stomata in lilac (Syringa vulgaris)

Lilac Leaf Stomata (syringa Vulgaris)
Scanning electron micrograph (sem) of lilac leaf stomata (Syringa vulgaris). Stomata are pores that open and close in order to regulate gas exchange in a plant. A stoma comprises a pore, the aperture of which is controlled by a pair of specialised cells known as guard cells. These cells swell to close the pore and shrink to open it. Stomata are found mainly on the underside of leaves. Magnification x6590 (x1622 at 10cm wide).

Lilac Leaf Stomata (Syringa vulgaris)

Power and Syred (2016)

In Fineartamerica –

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/lilac-leaf-stomata-syringa-vulgaris-power-and-syred.html

A new methodology of an automatic stomata classification and detection system

A Stomata Classification and Detection System in Microscope Images of Maize Cultivars

by Aono A. H., Nagai J. S., Dickel G. S., Marinho R. C., De Oliveira P. E. A. M., Faria F. A. (2019)

Alexandre H. Aono a, James S. Nagai a, Gabriella da S. M. Dickel b, Rafaela C. Marinho b, Paulo E. A. M. de Oliveira b, Fabio A. Faria a,∗

a Instituto de Ciéncia e Tecnologia, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo – UNIFESP 12247-014, S˜ao José dos Campos, SP – Brazil

b Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Uberlandia
Uberlandia, MG, Brazil

===

In biorxiv – doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/538165

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2019/02/01/538165.full.pdf

Abstract

Stomata are morphological structures of plants that have been receiving constant attention. These pores are responsible for the interaction between the internal plant system and the environment, working on different processes such as photosynthesis process and transpiration
stream.

Figure 3: Examples of stoma (a) and non-stoma (b) subimages/regions, which were manually selected and
labeled in this work.

As evaluated before, understanding the pore mechanism play a key role to explore the evolution and behavior of plants. Although the study of stomata in dicots species of plants have advanced, there is little information about stomata of cereal grasses. In addition, automated detection of these structures have been presented on the literature, but some gaps are still uncovered.

Figure 4: In-depth explanation of the stomata identification process.

This fact is motivated by high morphological variation of stomata and the presence of noise from the image acquisition step.

Figure 5: Fifteen different microscope images of Maize Cultivars used in this work.

Herein, we propose a new methodology of an automatic stomata classification and detection system in microscope images for maize cultivars. In our experiments, we have achieved an approximated accuracy of 97.1% in the identification of stomata regions using classifiers based on deep learning features.

Figure 6: Different types of noise present in the microscopic images. (a) the usage of cyanoacrylate glue can
generate air bubbles; (b) leaves residuals might be captured by the microscope; (c) the leaves might bend and
generate grooves in the image; (d) degradated stomata due to biological factors; and (e) low image quality due
to equipment limitations.

Stomata as an example of meristemoid development

Pattern formation in plant tissues

by Sachs T. (1991)

Tsvi sachs,

Book Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – pp.xii + 234 pp. ref.27 pp.  – ISBN :0521248655 –

https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19910306758

Abstract

The main purpose of this book is to consider the patterning of plant tissue using available concepts of the controls of patterning wherever possible, and to identify where modifications to these concepts are required, the general aim being to define broad principles concerning the specification of biological form.

This book comprises a series of related research essays, each chapter dealing with a defined problem and meant to be as self-contained as possible. Titles of the chapters are as follows: Interactions of developing organs; Hormones as correlative agents; Callus and tumor development; The polarization of tissues; The canalization of vascular differentiation; Cell lineages; Stomata as an example of meristemoid development; Expressions of cellular interactions; Apical meristems; The localization of new leaves; A temporal control of apical differentiation; and Generalizations about tissue patterning. Author and subject indexes are provided.

A morphogenetic basis for plant morphology

A morphogenetic basis for plant morphology

by Sachs T. (1982)

Tsvi Sachs,

In Acta Biotheoretiea 31 a: 118-131 – In: Sattler R. (eds) Axioms and Principles of Plant Construction. Springer, Dordrecht – https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7636-8_6

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-009-7636-8_6

Abstract: The Principles Considered

The paper is meant to explain and, where possible, briefly to substantiate the following central principles:

  1. The study of morphology has been based on the concept of homology or the assignment of different structures to one category. Categories based on intuitive groupings have been successful to a degree that merits explanation.
  2. A possible definition of homology that would include both ontogenetic and evolutionary considerations relates not to mature structure but to shared developmental processes.
  3. In the development of plant organs, processes occurring early in primordia generally show a wider homology than any others. (Therefore, categories such as “leaf” may be defined as groups whose members share some very early primordial states.)
  4. Since different processes cannot be expected to evolve at the same average rate, the conservative ones should be used as a basis for morphology. Developmental programs operating early in ontogeny are usually conservative from an evolutionary point of view because when they change there are many important consequences often leading to a disruption of the functional integrity of the mature structures. In plants this conservatism is apparent in meristematic stages of organ development and not in embryos or seedlings.
  5. The evolution of controls for the location, duration and timing of developmental processes could be expected to restrict plants to a limited number of morphological organ categories and to various intermediate organs: the observed facts can therefore be accounted for.