Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Two distinct strategies of cotton and soybean differing in leaf movement to perform photosynthesis under drought in the field

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Chow, Wah Soon
Zhang, Ya-Li
Hu, Yuan-Yuan
Luo, Hong-Hai
Zhang, Wang-Feng

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

CSIRO Publishing

Abstract

This paper reports an experimental test of the hypothesis that cotton and soybean differing in leaf movement have distinct strategies to perform photosynthesis under drought. Cotton and soybean were exposed to two water regimes: drought stressed and well watered. Drought-stressed cotton and soybean had lower maximum CO2 assimilation rates than well-watered (control) plants. Drought reduced the light saturation point and photorespiration of both species – especially in soybean. Area-based leaf nitrogen decreased in drought-stressed soybean but increased in drought-stressed cotton. Drought decreased PSII quantum yield (FPSII) in soybean leaves, but increased FPSII in cotton leaves. Drought induced an increase in light absorbed by the PSII antennae that is dissipated thermally via DpH- and xanthophylls-regulated processes in soybean leaves, but a decrease in cotton leaves. Soybean leaves appeared to have greater cyclic electron flow (CEF) around PSI than cotton leaves and drought further increased CEF in soybean leaves. In contrast, CEF slightly decreased in cotton under drought. These results suggest that the difference in leaf movement between cotton and soybean leaves gives rise to different strategies to perform photosynthesis and to contrasting photoprotective mechanisms for utilisation or dissipation of excess light energy. We suggest that soybean preferentially uses light-regulated non-photochemical energy dissipation, which may have been enhanced by the higher CEF in drought-stressed leaves. In contrast, cotton appears to rely on enhanced electron transport flux for light energy utilisation under drought, for example, in enhanced nitrogen assimilation.

Description

Citation

Source

Functional Plant Biology 38 (2011): 567–575

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

abcd