Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dvmhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-21T11:29:48.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Light-saturated CO2 assimilation rates of corn and velvetleaf in response to leaf nitrogen and development stage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

John L. Lindquist
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Single-leaf CO2 assimilation rate under saturating light (CA) varies as a function of leaf nitrogen content per unit leaf area (NL). Measured CA for many crop species also declines with developmental stage. Because these relationships may have strong implications for crop–weed competition, a field experiment was conducted to quantify corn and velvetleaf CA as influenced by leaf NL and stage of development. Crop and weed CA were measured on the most recent fully expanded leaves of plants grown in four nitrogen (N) application treatments. Both corn and velvetleaf CA increased with increasing NL, up to about 1.5 g N m−2. Corn and velvetleaf NL values were rarely less than 0.75 g N m−2, indicating that both species may restrict leaf growth in order to maintain constant NL under conditions of limited soil N. Corn CA declined to half its maximum by physiological maturity, whereas velvetleaf CA only declined 18%. Although velvetleaf CA was considerably lower than that of corn, the difference decreased as the growing season progressed. Because corn leaf production is complete by anthesis and velvetleaf continues vegetative production throughout its life cycle, velvetleaf will produce relatively greater quantities of biomass late in the season, which may increase competition for light.

Keywords

Velvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. ABUTHcorn, ‘Pioneer 3489 and 33A14’, Zea mays L.Photosynthesisrubiscocompetition
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 6 , December 2001 , pp. 706 - 710
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Ampong-Nyarko, K. and De Datta, S. K. 1993. Effects of light and nitrogen and their interaction on the dynamics of rice-weed competition. Weed Res. 33:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Wit, C. T., Goudriaan, J., van Laar, H. H., Penning de Vries, F.W.T., Rabbinge, R., van Keulen, H., Sibma, L., and de Jonge, C. 1978. Simulation of assimilation, respiration and transpiration of crops. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands: Simulation Monographs. 141 pp.Google Scholar
Evans, C. E. 1987. Soil test calibration. Pages 23–29 In Brown, J. R., ed. Soil testing: correlation, calibration, and interpretation. Special Publication 21. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Hasegawa, T. and Horie, T. 1996. Leaf nitrogen, plant age and crop dry matter production in rice. Field Crops Res. 47:107–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hikosaka, K. and Terashima, I. 1995. A model of the acclimation of photosynthesis in the leaves of C3 plants to sun and shade with respect to nitrogen use. Plant Cell Environ. 18:605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbert, D. W., Larigauderie, A., and Reynolds, J. F. 1991. The influence of carbon dioxide and daily photon flux density on optimal leaf nitrogen concentration and root:shoot ratio. Ann. Bot. 68:365–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, E. R. Jr., Weber, J. A., and Gates, D. M. 1985. Effects of nitrate application on Amaranthus powelii Wats. I. changes in photosynthesis, growth rates, and leaf area. Plant Physiol. 79:609–613.Google ScholarPubMed
Lindquist, J. L. and Mortensen, D. A. 1999. Ecophysiological characteristics of four maize hybrids and Abutilon theophrasti . Weed Res. 39:271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louwerse, W., Sibma, L., and van Kleef, J. 1990. Crop photosynthesis, respiration, and dry matter production in maize. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:479–484.Google Scholar
Makino, A. and Osmond, B. 1991. Effects of nitrogen nutrition on nitrogen partitioning between chloroplasts and mitochondria in pea and wheat. Plant Physiol. 96:355–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, B. and Vos, J. 1991. The relation between the nitrogen concentration and photosynthetic capacity of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) leaves. Ann. Bot. 68:33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muchow, R. C. 1990. Effects of leaf nitrogen and water regime on the photosynthetic capacity of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under field conditions. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 41:845–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muchow, R. C. and Carberry, P. S. 1989. Environmental control of phenology and leaf growth in a tropically-adapted maize. Field Crops Res. 20:221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muchow, R. C. and Sinclair, T. R. 1994. Nitrogen response of leaf photosynthesis and canopy radiation use efficiency in field-grown maize and sorghum. Crop Sci. 34:721–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, S., Cassman, K. G., and Kropff, M. J. 1995. Relationship between leaf photosynthesis and nitrogen content of field grown rice in tropics. Crop Sci. 35:1627–1630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sage, R. F. and Pearcy, R. W. 1987. The nitrogen use efficiency of C3 and C4 plants. II. Leaf nitrogen effects on the gas exchange characteristics of Chenopodium album L. and Amaranthus retroflexus L. Plant Physiol. 84:958–963.Google ScholarPubMed
Sage, R. F., Sharkey, T. D., and Pearcy, R. W. 1990. The effect of leaf nitrogen and temperature on the CO2 response of photosynthesis in the C3 dicot Chenopodium album L. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 17:135–148.Google Scholar
Sinclair, T. R. and Horie, T. 1989. Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, and crop radiation use efficiency: a review. Crop Sci. 29:90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinton, S. M., Buhler, D. D., Forcella, F., Gunsolus, J. L., and King, R. P. 1994. Estimation of crop yield loss due to interference by multiple weed species. Weed Sci. 42:103–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, S., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. 1985. Leaf conductance in relation to rate of CO2 assimilation. I. Influence of nitrogen nutrition, phosphorous nutrition, photon flux density, and ambient partial pressure of CO2 during ontogeny. Plant Physiol. 78:821–825.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed