Application of Photosynthetic Parameters in the Screening of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes for Improved Drought and High Temperature Tolerance

  • Marek Zivcak
  • Marian Brestic
  • Katarina Olsovska

Abstract

Under Low Co2 Or Alkaline Water Conditions, Cyanobacteria Use Bicarbonate Transporters To Pump In Bicarbonate As A Major Carbon Source. This Adaptive Co2 Concentrating Mechanism Allows Cyanobacteria To Survive Unfavorable Growth Conditions. In This Study, We Have Constitutively Expressed The High Affinity Bicarbonate Transporter Gene, IctB, From Cyanobacterium In Rice. All Four Transgenic Rice Lines Expressing The Transporter Exhibited Enhanced Photosynthetic Capacity, Growth And Grain Yield. Relative To Untransformed Wild Type Plants, The Transgenic Plants Had Photosynthesis Rates, 15–20% Higher Carboxylation Efficiencies, And Lower Photosynthetic Co2 Compensation Points. Activities Of Ribulose 1,5-Bisphosphate Carboxylase And Pep Carboxylase Were Also Higher In These Transgenic Lines. Consistently, The Transgenic Plants Produced 10–120% More Tillers Or Panicles Per Plant And 10–70% More Grains, Relative To The Wild Type. The Enhancements In Growth And Grain Yield Are Closely Related With The Increased Photosynthetic Capacity Among The Transgenic Lines. Yield Increases Were Also Confirmed In A Preliminary Field Trial. This Study Demonstrates That The Simple Co2 Concentrating Mechanism From Cyanobacterium Can Largely Improve The Photosynthetic Efficiency, Growth And Productivity Of C3 Crops.

Keywords

Cyanobacterium bicarbonate transporter transgenic rice photosynthesis growth 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Araus JL et al. (2002) Plant breeding and drought in C3 cereals: What should we breed for? Ann Bot 89:925-940.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum A, Zhang JX, Nguyen, HT (1999) Consistent differences among wheat cultivars in osmotic adjustment and their relationship to plant production. Field Crop Res 64: 287-291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chaves MM, Pereira JS, Maroco J (2002) How plants cope with water stress in the field. Photosynthesis and growth. Ann Bot 89:907-916.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen J (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, MI.Google Scholar
  5. Fischer RA, Maurer R (1978) Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars: I. Grain yield responses. Aust J Agric Res 29:897-912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Reynolds MP (2001) Application of physiology in wheat breading. In: Reynolds MP (ed) Application of Physiology in Wheat Breeding. CIMMYT, Mexico, pp 2-16.Google Scholar
  7. Strasser RJ, Srivastava A, Govindjee (1995) Polyphasic chlorophyll a fluorescence transients in plants and cyanobacteria. J Photochem Photobiol 61:32-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Strasser RJ, Srivastava A, Tsimilli-Michael M (2000) The fluorescence transient as a tool to characterize and screen photosynthetic samples. In: Mohanty P, Yunus M, Pathre U (eds) Probing Photosynthesis: Mechanism, Regulation & Adaptation. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 443-480.Google Scholar
  9. Turner NC (1997) Further progress in crop water relations. Adv Agron 58:293-338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Zivcak M (2006) Application of physiological criteria in screening of genotypes tolerant to drought. Dissertation, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marek Zivcak
    • 1
  • Marian Brestic
    • 1
  • Katarina Olsovska
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant PhysiologySlovak University of AgricultureNitraSlovakia

Personalised recommendations