Hampshire College, School of Natural Science, Amherst, MA 01002, USA.
Trends Plant Sci. 2011 Jul;16(7):353-5. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2011.03.010. Epub 2011 Apr 30.
The primary goal of our previous opinion paper (Winship, L.J. et al. (2010) Trends Plant Sci. 15, 363-369) [1] was to put two models for the control of pollen tube growth on the same theoretical and biophysical footing, and to then test both for consistency with basic principles and with experimental data. Our central thesis, then and now, is that the biophysical and biochemical mechanisms that enable pollen tubes to grow and to respond to their environment evolved in a physical context constrained by known, inescapable principles. First, pressure is a scalar, not a vector quantity. Second, the water movement in and out of plant cells that generates pressure is passive, not active, and is controlled by differences in water potential. Here we respond to the issues raised by Zonia and Munnik (Trends Plant Sci. 2011; this issue) [2] in the light of new evidence concerning turgor pressure and pollen tube growth rates.
我们之前的观点论文（Winship，L.J.等人（2010）Trends Plant Sci. 15，363-369）[1]的主要目标是将两种控制花粉管生长的模型建立在相同的理论和生物物理基础上，然后用基本原理和实验数据来检验这两种模型的一致性。我们当时和现在的中心论点是，使花粉管生长并对其环境做出反应的生物物理和生化机制是在由已知的、不可避免的原理所限制的物理环境中进化而来的。首先，压力是标量，不是矢量。其次，在植物细胞内外产生压力的水运动是被动的，而不是主动的，并且由水势差控制。在这里，我们根据有关膨压和花粉管生长速率的新证据，对 Zonia 和 Munnik（Trends Plant Sci. 2011；本期）[2]提出的问题进行了回应。
