Advertisement

Photosynthesis Research

, Volume 105, Issue 1, pp 15–25 | Cite as

Altered physiological function, not structure, drives increased radiation-use efficiency of soybean grown at elevated CO2

  • Uwe Rascher
  • Bernhard Biskup
  • Andrew D. B. Leakey
  • Justin M. McGrath
  • Elizabeth A. Ainsworth
Regular Paper

Abstract

Previous studies of elevated carbon dioxide concentration ([CO2]) on crop canopies have found that radiation-use efficiency is increased more than radiation-interception efficiency. It is assumed that increased radiation-use efficiency is due to changes in leaf-level physiology; however, canopy structure can affect radiation-use efficiency if leaves are displayed in a manner that optimizes their physiological capacity, even though the canopy intercepts the same amount of light. In order to determine the contributions of physiology and canopy structure to radiation-use and radiation-interception efficiency, this study relates leaf-level physiology and leaf display to photosynthetic rate of the outer canopy. We used a new imaging approach that delivers three-dimensional maps of the outer canopy during the growing season. The 3D data were used to model leaf orientation and mean photosynthetic electron transport of the outer canopy to show that leaf orientation changes did not contribute to increased radiation-use; i.e. leaves of the outer canopy showed similar diurnal leaf movements and leaf orientation in both treatments. Elevated [CO2] resulted in an increased maximum electron transport rate (ETRmax) of light reactions of photosynthesis. Modeling of canopy light interception showed that stimulated leaf-level electron transport at elevated [CO2], and not alterations in leaf orientation, was associated with stimulated radiation-use efficiency and biomass production in elevated [CO2]. This study provides proof of concept of methodology to quantify structure–function relationships in combination, allowing a quantitative estimate of the contribution of both effects to canopy energy conversion under elevated [CO2].

Keywords

Three-dimensional canopy surface Photosynthesis Light reactions Chlorophyll fluorescence Elevated CO2 Glycine max Structure–function relations 

Abbreviations

ψ

Leaf incidence angle, i.e. angle between sun and leaf normal

α

Leaf absorbance, i.e. proportion of absorbed PPFD

A

Photosynthetic CO2 uptake rate (μmol m−2 s−1)

ETR

Photosynthetic electron transport rate (μmol electrons m−2 s−1)

ETRmax

Maximum photosynthetic electron transport rate at light saturation (μmol electrons m−2 s−1)

F

Fluorescence of the light-adapted leaf

F0

Minimum fluorescence of the dark-adapted leaf

Fm

Maximum fluorescence of the dark-adapted leaf

\( F^{\prime}_{\text{m}} \)

Maximum fluorescence of the light-adapted leaf

Fv/Fm

Maximum quantum efficiency of PS II (F v = F m − F 0)

LAI

Leaf area index (m2 of leaf/m2 of ground)

PPFD

Photosynthetic photon flux density (λ = 400–700 nm) (μmol photons m−2 s−1)

PPFDdir

Direct photosynthetic photon flux density on a horizontal surface (λ = 400–700 nm) (μmol photons m−2 s−1)

PPFDdiff

Diffuse photosynthetic photon flux density (λ = 400–700 nm) (μmol photons m−2 s−1)

PPFDinci

Effective incident photosynthetic photon flux density on the leaf surface (λ = 400–700 nm) (μmol photons m−2 s−1)

PS

Photosystem

Vc,max

Maximum apparent carboxylation capacity of Rubisco (μmol m−2 s−1)

\( \Updelta F /F^{\prime}_{\text{m}} \)

Effective quantum efficiency of PS II (\( \Updelta F = F^{\prime}_{\text{m}} - F \)) measured at ambient light

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Tim Mies for technical assistance, and Steve Long for supporting our research at SoyFACE. SoyFACE was supported by the Illinois Council for Food and Agricultural Research, Archer Daniels Midland Company, the U.S. Department of Agricultural, and the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station. B. Biskup and U. Rascher were supported by a NSF/DAAD grant (grant PPP D/05/50496). B. Biskup also acknowledges support of his PhD thesis by the Heinrich-Heine University of Düsseldorf, Germany. We thank K.G. Rascher for assistance with the statistical analyses, and D. Ort for valuable discussions. We also greatly thank H. Scharr for supporting the development of the stereo system and the development of the analyses algorithms.

References

  1. Ainsworth EA, Long SP (2005) What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol 165:351–372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ainsworth EA, Rogers A, Nelson RL, Long SP (2004) Testing the “source-sink” hypothesis of down-regulation of photosynthesis in elevated [CO2] in the field with single gene substitutions in Glycine max. Agric For Meteorol 122:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ainsworth EA, Rogers A, Leakey ADB (2008) Targets for crop biotechnology in a future high-CO2 and high-O3 world. Plant Physiol 147:13–19CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bawhey CI, Grant RH, Gao W (2003) Digital measurement of heliotropic leaf response in soybean cultivars and leaf exposure to solar UVB radiation. Agric For Meteorol 120:161–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernacchi CJ, Leakey ADB, Heady LE, Morgan PB, Dohleman FG, McGrath JM, Gillespie KM, Wittig VE, Rogers A, Long SP, Ort DR (2006) Hourly and seasonal variation in photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of soybean grown at future CO2 and ozone concentrations for 3 years under fully open-air field conditions. Plant Cell Environ 29:2077–2090CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bilger W, Schreiber U, Bock M (1995) Determination of the quantum efficiency of photosystem II and of non-photochemical quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence in the field. Oecologia 102:425–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biskup B, Scharr H, Schurr U, Rascher U (2007) A stereo imaging system for measuring structural parameters of plant canopies. Plant Cell Environ 30:1299–1308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dermody O, Long SP, DeLucia EH (2006) How does elevated CO2 or ozone affect the leaf-area index of soybean when applied independently? New Phytol 169:145–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Dermody O, Long SP, McConnaughay K, DeLucia EH (2008) How do elevated CO2 and O3 affect the interception and utilization of radiation by a soybean canopy? Glob Chang Biol 14:556–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Falster DS, Westoby M (2003) Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: what consequences for light interception? New Phytol 158:509–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farquhar GD, von Caemmerer S, Berry JA (1980) A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149:78–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirose T, Ackerly DD, Traw MB, Ramseier D, Bazzaz FA (1997) CO2 elevation, canopy photosynthesis and optimal leaf area index. Ecology 78:2339–2350Google Scholar
  13. Leakey ADB, Ort DR, Long SP (2006) Long-term growth of soybean at elevated [CO2] does not cause acclimation of stomatal conductance under fully open-air conditions. Plant Cell Environ 29:1794–1800CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Leakey ADB, Xu F, Gillespie KM, McGrath JM, Ainsworth EA, Ort DR (2009) Genomic basis for stimulated respiration by plants growing under elevated carbon dioxide. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:3597–3602CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lichtenthaler HK (1987) Chlorophylls and carotenoids—pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. Methods Enzymol 148:350–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Long SP, Bernacchi CJ (2003) Gas exchange measurements, what can they tell us about the underlying limitations to photosynthesis? Procedures and sources of error. J Exp Bot 54:2393–2401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Long SP, Zhu X-G, Naidu SL, Ort DR (2006) Can improvement in photosynthesis increase crop yield? Plant Cell Environ 29:315–330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Morgan PB, Bernacchi CJ, Ort DR, Long SP (2004) An in vivo analysis of the effect of season-long open-air elevation of ozone to anticipated 2050 levels on photosynthesis in soybean. Plant Physiol 135:2348–2357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Morgan PB, Bollero GA, Nelson RL, Dohleman FG, Long SP (2005) Smaller than predicted increase in aboveground net primary production and yield of field-grown soybean under fully open-air [CO2] elevation. Glob Chang Biol 11:1856–1865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Norby RJ, Delucia EH, Gielen B, Calfapietra C, Giardina CP, King JS, Ledford J, McCarthy HR, Moore DJP, Ceulemans R, De Angelis P, Finzi AC, Karnosky DF, Kubiske ME, Lukac M, Pregitzer KS, Scarascia-Mugnozza G, Schlesinger WH, Oren R (2005) Forest response to elevated CO2 is conserved across a broad range of productivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:18052–18056CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pearcy RW, Yang WM (1996) A three-dimensional crown architecture model for assessment of light capture and carbon gain by understory plants. Oecologia 108:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Porra RJ, Thompson WA, Kriedemann PE (1989) Determination of accurate extinction coefficients and simultaneous equations for assaying chlorophylls a and b extracted with four different solvents: verification of the concentration of chlorophyll standards by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Biochim Biophys Acta 975:384–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rascher U, Liebig M, Lüttge U (2000) Evaluation of instant light-response curves of chlorophyll-fluorescence parameters obtained with a portable chlorophyll fluorometer on site in the field. Plant Cell Environ 23:1397–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rascher U, Bobich EG, Lin GH, Walter A, Morris T, Naumann M, Nichol CJ, Pierce D, Bil K, Kudeyarov V, Berry JA (2004) Functional diversity of photosynthesis during drought in a model tropical rainforest—the contributions of leaf area, photosynthetic electron transport and stomatal conductance to reduction in net ecosystem carbon exchange. Plant Cell Environ 27:1239–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rogers A, Allen DJ, Davey PA, Morgan PB, Ainsworth EA, Bernacchi CJ, Cornic G, Dermody O, Heaton EA, Mahoney J, Zhu X, Delucia EH, Ort DR, Long SP (2004) Leaf photosynthesis and carbohydrate dynamics of soybeans grown throughout their life-cycle under free-air carbon dioxide enrichment. Plant Cell Environ 27:449–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosa LM, Forseth IN (1995) Diurnal patterns of soybean leaf inclination angles and azimuthal orientation under different levels of UVB radiation. Agric For Meteorol 78:107–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. von Caemmerer S, Farquhar GD (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange of leaves. Planta 153:376–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ward JK, Strain BR (1999) Elevated CO2 studies: past, present and future. Tree Physiol 19:211–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Welles JM, Norman JM (1991) Instrument for indirect measurement of canopy architecture. Agron J 83:818–825Google Scholar
  30. Wofford TJ, Allen FL (1982) Variation in leaflet orientation among soybean cultivars. Crop Sci 22:999CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uwe Rascher
    • 1
  • Bernhard Biskup
    • 1
  • Andrew D. B. Leakey
    • 2
    • 3
  • Justin M. McGrath
    • 2
  • Elizabeth A. Ainsworth
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Chemistry and Dynamics of the Geosphere: ICG-3Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbHJülichGermany
  2. 2.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  3. 3.Institute for Genomic BiologyUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  4. 4.U.S. Department of Agriculture, Photosynthesis Research Unit, Agricultural Research ServiceUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations