Drought Stress and Elevated CO(2) Effects on Soybean Ribulose Bisphosphate Carboxylase Activity and Canopy Photosynthetic Rates.
Soybean (Glycine max [L.] cv Bragg) was grown at 330 or 660 microliters CO(2) per liter in outdoor, controlled-environment chambers. When the plants were 50 days old, drought stress was imposed by gradually reducing irrigation each evening so that plants wilted earlier each succeeding day. On the ninth day, as the pots ran out of water CO(2) exchange rate (CER) decreased rapidly to near zero for the remainder of the day. Both CO(2)-enrichment and drought stress reduced the total (HCO(3) (-)/Mg(2+)-activated) extractable ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase (RuBPCase) activity, as expressed on a chlorophyll basis. In addition, drought stress when canopy CER values and leaf water potentials were lowest, reduced the initial (nonactivated) RuBPCase activity by 50% compared to the corresponding unstressed treatments. This suggests that moderate to severe drought stress reduces the in vivo activation state of RuBPCase, as well as lowers the total activity. It is hypothesized that stromal acidification under drought stress causes the lowered initial RuBPCase activities. The K(m)(CO(2)) values of activated RuBPCase from stressed and unstressed plants were similar; 15.0 and 12.6 micromolar, respectively. RuBP levels were 10 to 30% lower in drought stressed as compared to unstressed treatments. However, RuBP levels increased from near zero at night to around 150 to 200 nanomoles per milligram chlorophyll during the day, even as water potentials and canopy CERs decreased. This suggests that the rapid decline in canopy CER cannot be attributed to drought stress induced limitations in the RuBP regeneration capability. Thus, in soybean leaves, a nonstomatal limitation of leaf photosynthesis under drought stress conditions appears due, in part, to a reduction of the in vivo activity of RuBPCase. Because initial RuBPCase activities were not reduced as much as canopy CER values, this enzymic effect does not explain entirely the response of soybean photosynthesis to drought stress.
Vu
J C
JC
Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611.
Allen
L H
LH
Bowes
G
G