Skip to main content
Plant Physiology logoLink to Plant Physiology
. 1970 Aug;46(2):236–239. doi: 10.1104/pp.46.2.236

Differing Sensitivity of Photosynthesis to Low Leaf Water Potentials in Corn and Soybean 1

J S Boyer a
PMCID: PMC396570  PMID: 16657442

Abstract

Rates of net photosynthesis were studied in soil-grown corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max) plants having various leaf water potentials. Soybean was unaffected by desiccation until leaf water potentials were below −11 bars. Rates of photosynthesis in corn were inhibited whenever leaf water potentials dropped below −3.5 bars.

The differences in photosynthetic behavior could be attributed solely to differences in stomatal behavior down to leaf water potentials of −16 bars in soybean and −10 bars in corn. Below these potentials, other factors in addition to stomatal closure caused inhibition, although their effect was relatively small.

Corn, which has the C4-dicarboxylic acid pathway for carbon fixation, generally had a higher rate of photosynthesis than soybean during desiccation. Nevertheless, since inhibition of photosynthesis began at higher potentials than in soybean, and since corn was less able to withstand severe desiccation without tissue death, it was concluded that the C4 pathway confers no particular ability to withstand low leaf water potentials.

Full text

PDF
238

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Boyer J. S., Bowen B. L. Inhibition of oxygen evolution in chloroplasts isolated from leaves with low water potentials. Plant Physiol. 1970 May;45(5):612–615. doi: 10.1104/pp.45.5.612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boyer J. S. Isopiestic technique: measurement of accurate leaf water potentials. Science. 1966 Dec 16;154(3755):1459–1460. doi: 10.1126/science.154.3755.1459. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Boyer J. S. Leaf enlargement and metabolic rates in corn, soybean, and sunflower at various leaf water potentials. Plant Physiol. 1970 Aug;46(2):233–235. doi: 10.1104/pp.46.2.233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Forrester M. L., Krotkov G., Nelson C. D. Effect of oxygen on photosynthesis, photorespiration and respiration in detached leaves. I. Soybean. Plant Physiol. 1966 Mar;41(3):422–427. doi: 10.1104/pp.41.3.422. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Schneider G. W., Childers N. F. INFLUENCE OF SOIL MOISTURE ON PHOTOSYNTHESIS, RESPIRATION, AND TRANSPIRATION OF APPLE LEAVES. Plant Physiol. 1941 Jul;16(3):565–583. doi: 10.1104/pp.16.3.565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Shimshi D. Effect of Soil Moisture and Phenylmercuric Acetate upon Stomatal Aperture, Transpiration, and Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. 1963 Nov;38(6):713–721. doi: 10.1104/pp.38.6.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Twente J. W., Twente J. A. Regulation of hibernating periods by temperature. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1965 Oct;54(4):1044–1051. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Plant Physiology are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES