4.7 Article

Physiology of maize II:: Identification of physiological markers representative of the nitrogen status of maize (Zea mays) leaves during grain filling

Journal

PHYSIOLOGIA PLANTARUM
Volume 124, Issue 2, Pages 178-188

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00511.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To illustrate the development of the source-to-sink transition in maize leaves during the grain-filling period, an integrated physiological-agronomic approach is presented in this study. The evolution of physiological markers such as total leaf nitrogen (N), chlorophyll, soluble protein, amino acid and ammonium contents was monitored from silking to a period close to maturity in different leaf stages of three maize genotypes grown at high and low levels of N fertilization. In addition, the activities of glutamine synthetase (GS) and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), two enzymes known to play a direct or an indirect role during leaf N remobilization, were measured. In the three genotypes examined, we found that a general decrease of most metabolic and enzyme markers occurred during leaf ageing and that this decrease was enhanced when plants were N starved. In contrast, such variations were not observed between different sections of a single leaf even at an advanced stage of leaf senescence. We found that there is a strong correlation between total N, chlorophyll, soluble protein and GS activity, which is not dependent upon the N fertilization level, which indicates the N status of the plant, either in a single leaf or during ageing. In contrast, ammonium, amino acids and GDH activity were not subject to such variations, thus suggesting that they are indicators of the metabolic activity of the whole plant in response to the level of N fertilization. The use of these markers to predict the N status of maize as a function of both plant development and N availability is discussed.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available