4.3 Article

Water-deficiency effects on single leaf gas exchange and on C4 pathway enzymes of maize genotypes with differing abiotic stress tolerance

Journal

PHOTOSYNTHETICA
Volume 53, Issue 1, Pages 3-10

Publisher

ACAD SCIENCES CZECH REPUBLIC, INST EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
DOI: 10.1007/s11099-015-0074-9

Keywords

C-4 photosynthesis; drought; enzyme activities; gene expression; phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Responses to drought were studied using two maize inbred lines (B76 and B106) and a commercial maize hybrid (Zea mays L. cv. Silver Queen) with differing resistance to abiotic stress. Maize seedlings were grown in pots in controlled environment chambers for 17 days and watering was withheld from one half the plants for an additional 11 days. On the final treatment date, leaf water potentials did not differ among genotypes and were -0.84 and -1.49 MPa in the water sufficient and insufficient treatments, respectively. Greater rates of CO2 assimilation were retained by the stress tolerant maize inbred line, B76, in comparison to the other two genotypes 11 days after watering was withheld. Rates of CO2 assimilation for all three genotypes were unaffected by decreasing the measurement O-2 concentration from 21 to 2% (v/v). Activities of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC), NADP-malic enzyme (NADP-ME), and NADP malate dehydrogenase were inhibited from 25 to 49% by the water deficiency treatment. Genotypic differences also were detected for the activities of NADP-ME and for PEPC. Changes of transcript abundance for the three C-4 pathway enzymes also varied among watering treatments and genotypes. However, examples where transcripts decreased due to drought were associated with the two stress susceptible genotypes. The above results showed that enzymes in the C-4 photosynthetic pathway were less inhibited by drought in stress tolerant compared to stress susceptible maize genotypes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available