Dynamic light caused less photosynthetic suppression, rather than more, under nitrogen deficit conditions than under sufficient nitrogen supply conditions in soybean

Plants are always exposed to dynamic light. The photosynthetic light use efficiency of leaves is lower in dynamic light than in uniform irradiance. Research on the influence of environmental factors on dynamic photosynthesis is very limited. Nitrogen is critical for plants, especially for photosynth...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMC plant biology Vol. 20; no. 1; pp. 339 - 13
Main Authors Li, Yu-Ting, Li, Ying, Li, Yue-Nan, Liang, Ying, Sun, Qiang, Li, Geng, Liu, Peng, Zhang, Zi-Shan, Gao, Hui-Yuan
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BioMed Central Ltd 17.07.2020
BioMed Central
BMC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Plants are always exposed to dynamic light. The photosynthetic light use efficiency of leaves is lower in dynamic light than in uniform irradiance. Research on the influence of environmental factors on dynamic photosynthesis is very limited. Nitrogen is critical for plants, especially for photosynthesis. Low nitrogen (LN) decreases ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco) and thus limits photosynthesis. The decrease in Rubisco also delays photosynthetic induction in LN leaves; therefore, we hypothesized that the difference of photosynthetic CO fixation between uniform and dynamic light will be greater in LN leaves compared to leaves with sufficient nitrogen supply. To test this hypothesis, soybean plants were grown under low or high nitrogen (HN), and the photosynthetic gas exchange, enzyme activity and protein amount in leaves were measured under uniform and dynamic light. Unexpectedly, dynamic light caused less photosynthetic suppression, rather than more, in LN leaves than in HN leaves. The underlying mechanism was also clarified. Short low-light (LL) intervals did not affect Rubisco activity but clearly deactivated fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase (FBPase) and sedoheptulose-1,7-bisphosphatase (SBPase), indicating that photosynthetic induction after a LL interval depends on the reactivation of FBPase and SBPase rather than Rubisco. In LN leaves, the amount of Rubisco decreased more than FBPase and SBPase, so FBPase and SBPase were present in relative excess. A lower fraction of FBPase and SBPase needs to be activated in LN leaves for photosynthesis recovery during the high-light phase of dynamic light. Therefore, photosynthetic recovery is faster in LN leaves than in HN leaves, which relieves the photosynthetic suppression caused by dynamic light in LN leaves. Contrary to our expectations, dynamic light caused less photosynthetic suppression, rather than more, in LN leaves than in HN leaves of soybean. This is the first report of a stress condition alleviating the photosynthetic suppression caused by dynamic light.
ISSN:1471-2229
1471-2229
DOI:10.1186/s12870-020-02516-y