For flowering plants, the very early stages of sexual reproduction are arguably the most important. At the level of the pollen-stigma interaction, molecular decisions are made that determine the 'compatibility' of the interacting partners. Such decisions, if made correctly, avoid wastage of resources that could impact reproductive fitness21. Thus, permitting only compatible pollen to effect fertilization is one important component of maintaining well adapted genotypes, and thus the evolutionary success of species. Research conducted with the model plant A. thaliana has been extremely valuable in deepening our understanding of this process. A number of studies over the past few decades have revealed the presence of factors in the pollen coat that act at the first compatibility 'checkpoint', where the pollen gains access to stigmatic water to permit pollen hydration13. Despite these first insights into the mechanisms that regulate pollen-stigma compatibility, there are still many gaps in our understanding of this process. To date, no mutants of pollen-borne ligands or stigmatic receptors known to impact pollen hydration can completely block compatible pollination, suggesting the presence of other undiscovered pollen hydration determinants. By being able to readily observe the phenotype of interest, the pollen hydration bioassay described here is one of the most straightforward techniques to study potential mutants that regulate pollination.
Existing methodologies for measuring pollen hydration commonly utilize bulk pollinations and report fewer timepoints14,22,23, and thus may miss important subtle hydration profile phenotypes. For example, the study by Wang et al.13, along with work on other pollen coat protein mutants in our lab (unpublished observations), have revealed intriguing differences in hydration profiles between mutants. Such subtle differences may hold important clues to the regulatory mechanisms underlying compatible pollination.
The method described here focuses on the acquisition of relatively small numbers of measurement between mutant and WT plant lines, with an emphasis on methodological precision to reduce variation within the datasets. Whilst this method is highly reproducible (as shown in Figure 7), assuming that temperature and humidity are adequately controlled, it is important to gather hydration data for nearly equal numbers of WT and mutant pollen on the same day to further reduce the potential for variation. Data can be then pooled across different days if required. In addition, selecting the appropriate WT control plants is vital for correct interpretation of the hydration results. For the pollen recipient, the same plant line should be used for receiving both WT control and mutant pollen grains.
For example, we use the pA9-barnase male sterile plant line, which is also featured in the video protocol, as the pollen recipient for both WT (control) and mutant (experimental) pollen when investigating T-DNA pollen mutant lines (such as the 'KD' mutant described in Figure 8). The mixing of data from such a male sterile line, which need not be emasculated, with that gathered from a manually emasculated control line should be avoided as these stigmas will likely behave differently. Likewise, emasculated mutant lines should be utilized in conjunction with an emasculated WT (control) line whenever possible. The same caution should also be applied when considering the genetic background of the plants under study. While most popular T-DNA mutant collections were generated in the Col-0 background, others, such as the FLAG collection from Institut national de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), are available in the Wassilewskija (WS) genetic background24,25. In such cases, it is advisable to use the respective ecotype's WT plant lines as controls.
Although here we have focused on pollen hydration over the first 10 min of the pollen-stigma interaction, this method can also be adapted to encompass hydration profiles that cover a longer time period. A key feature of the protocol is that flowers remain attached to the parent plant-current published protocols typically require excision of the pistil and placement in media to sustain the tissue for the duration of the experiment14,18,26. Although there is no direct evidence to suggest such a semi in vivo approach impacts pollen hydration or indeed alters the in vivo regulation of this process, it is conceivable that excision of the flowers from the parent plant could impact pollination. Thus, this protocol achieves a true in vivo environment for the study of the pollen-stigma interaction, where the structural integrity of the plant is preserved.
The transfer of single pollen grains to 'virgin' stigmatic papillae is arguably one of the most challenging operations described in this protocol. It is not uncommon to transfer clusters of pollen grains in error. However, the chance of this occurring can be greatly reduced by ensuring that only a monolayer of pollen is present on the forceps (Figure 3A) (or even just a single pollen grain; Figure 5), and/or by utilizing pollen grains that are already orientated, such that they 'protrude' from others on the tip of the forceps. We have found that an experienced operator can successfully complete the transfer of a single pollen to a stigmatic papilla cell in approximately 3 min and record data for up to five pollen grains over a 1 h period. Thus, over a period of 2-4 days, enough data can be accumulated for meaningful statistical analysis of the plant lines under study.
Human error is potentially the biggest source of variation in the analysis of datasets derived from studies utilizing this protocol. For example, the definition of the 'pollen boundary' during image analysis comes down to the judgement of the individual researcher. Thus, there is the potential that measurements made by different researchers, even on the same dataset, may generate variation. Wherever possible, a single researcher should carry out the measurements to minimize sampling errors. In addition, coupling the analysis of WT and mutant datasets by the same operator negates the potentially subjective definition of the 'pollen boundary' and interoperator variation.
In conclusion, a sophisticated yet accurate method to measure pollen hydration profiles in the model organism A. thaliana is described. We have demonstrated that, by utilizing this protocol, highly consistent pollen hydration data for A. thaliana can be readily acquired. Three independent batches of data for WT pollinations acquired on different days showed consistent small deviations of <3% across all timepoints (Figure 7 and Supplementary Table S1). Although the bioassay presented here is slightly more complex than most existing protocols, the resolution of the data generated is superior and suitable for the identification and characterization of novel mutants that impact pathways regulating compatible pollination.