4.7 Article

Contributions of root uptake and remobilization to grain zinc accumulation in wheat depending on post-anthesis zinc availability and nitrogen nutrition

期刊

PLANT AND SOIL
卷 361, 期 1-2, 页码 177-187

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-012-1300-x

关键词

Nitrogen; Post-anthesis; Remobilization; Uptake; Wheat; Zinc

资金

  1. HarvestPlus Program
  2. HarvestPlus Global Zinc Fertilizer Project
  3. Mosaic Company
  4. K + S Kali GmbH
  5. International Zinc Association
  6. Omex Agrifluids
  7. International Fertilizer Industry Association
  8. International Plant Nutrition Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and aims Whether root Zn uptake during grain filling or remobilization from pre-anthesis Zn stores contributes more to grain Zn in wheat is subject to an on-going debate. This study investigated the effects of N nutrition and post-anthesis Zn availability on the relative importance of these sources. Methods Durum wheat plants were grown in nutrient solution containing adequate Zn (0.5 mu M) and three different N levels (0.5; 1.5; 4.5 mM). One third of the plants were harvested when they reached anthesis. One half of the remaining plants were grown to maturity with adequate Zn, whereas the Zn supply to the other half was discontinued at anthesis. Roots, straw and grains were harvested separately and analyzed for Zn and N. Results Depending on the N supply, Zn remobilization from pre-anthesis sources provided almost all of grain Zn when the Zn supply was withheld at anthesis; otherwise up to 100 % of grain Zn could be accounted for by Zn taken up post-anthesis. By promoting tillering and grain yield and extending the grain filling, higher N supply favored the contribution of Zn uptake to grain Zn accumulation. Conclusion Remobilization is critical for grain Zn accumulation when Zn availability is restricted during grain filling. However, where root uptake can continue, concurrent Zn uptake during grain development, favored by higher N supply, overshadows net remobilization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据