4.2 Article

Leaf photosynthetic properties and biomass accumulation of selected western Canadian spring wheat cultivars

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
卷 91, 期 2, 页码 305-314

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.4141/CJPS09163

关键词

Biomass; chlorophyll fluorescence; photoinhibition; photosynthesis; spring wheat; xanthophyll cycle

资金

  1. Department of Biochemistry, University of Saskatchewan
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current studies indicate wheat straw as a viable source for the production of cellulosic ethanol. Since photosynthetic performance impacts the overall success of the mature plant, this study aimed to measure the photosynthetic vigour of 11 spring wheat cultivars during field development as well as their biomass composition at maturity to determine which would be optimum for ethanol production. All cultivars had similar maximal quantum yields of photosystem II photochemistry (F-V/F-M), normalized difference vegetation index and biomass composition in the field. However, differences were observed in photosynthetic rate, with McKenzie having the highest light-saturated maximal rate of CO2 uptake (A(max)) and apparent quantum yield of CO2 uptake (Phi(app) CO2), while also having the best water use efficiency. Snowbird was found to have the lowest CO2-compensation point (Gamma*) and A(max). Upon subjecting wheat samples to photoinhibitory conditions, McKenzie and Kyle were found to be the most resistant and susceptible, respectively, with a difference of 11% in F-V/F-M. Abundance of xanthophyll pigments were not found to be a contributing cause to differential photoinhibitory resistance as there was not a noticeable difference between cultivars. Although some cultivars were found to have enhanced photosynthetic traits over others, these were slight and did not contribute to changes in plant biomass. However, McKenzie did present a higher cellulose content, which would be favourable for ethanol production.

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

4.2
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