Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress: II. Acclimation of photosynthesis.

The photosynthetic characteristics of two contrasting varieties of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) have been determined. These varieties, Arroz and Orfeo, differ in their productivity under stress conditions, resistance to drought stress, and have distinctly different stomatal behaviour. When grown under conditions of high irradiance and high temperature, both varieties displayed evidence of photosynthetic acclimation at the chloroplast level-there was an increase in chlorophyll a/b ratio, a decreased content of Lhcb proteins, and an increased xanthophyll cycle pool size. Both varieties also showed reduced chlorophyll content on a leaf area basis and a decrease in leaf area. Both varieties showed an increase in leaf thickness but only Arroz showed the characteristic elongated palisade cells in the high light-grown plants; Orfeo instead had a larger number of smaller, rounded cells. Differences were found in stomatal development: whereas Arroz showed very little change in stomatal density, Orfeo exhibited a large increase, particularly on the upper leaf surface. It is suggested that these differences in leaf cell structure and stomatal density give rise to altered rates of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance. Whereas, Arroz had the same photosynthetic rate in plants grown at both low and high irradiance, Orfeo showed a higher photosynthetic capacity at high irradiance. It is suggested that the higher yield of Orfeo compared with Arroz under stress conditions can be explained, in part, by these cellular differences.

[1]  A. Fleming The control of leaf development. , 2004, The New phytologist.

[2]  Peter Horton,et al.  Paraheliotropism can protect water-stressed bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants against photoinhibition. , 2004, Journal of plant physiology.

[3]  Claudio Pastenes,et al.  Leaf movements and photoinhibition in relation to water stress in field-grown beans. , 2004, Journal of experimental botany.

[4]  A. Hetherington,et al.  Plant Development: YODA the Stomatal Switch , 2004, Current Biology.

[5]  Dominique C Bergmann,et al.  Stomatal Development and Pattern Controlled by a MAPKK Kinase , 2004, Science.

[6]  I. Terashima,et al.  Developmental process of sun and shade leaves in Chenopodium album L. , 2004 .

[7]  F. Sack,et al.  Stomatal development: cross talk puts mouths in place. , 2003, Trends in plant science.

[8]  T. Altmann,et al.  Photosynthetic performance of an Arabidopsis mutant with elevated stomatal density (sdd1-1) under different light regimes. , 2003, Journal of experimental botany.

[9]  S. Rolfe,et al.  Identification of Mutants of Arabidopsis Defective in Acclimation of Photosynthesis to the Light Environment1 , 2003, Plant Physiology.

[10]  F. Woodward,et al.  Long‐distance CO2 signalling in plants , 2002 .

[11]  I. Terashima,et al.  Separate localization of light signal perception for sun or shade type chloroplast and palisade tissue differentiation in Chenopodium album. , 2001, Plant & cell physiology.

[12]  Stefan Jansson,et al.  Acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to the light environment: the existence of separate low light and high light responses , 2001, Planta.

[13]  J. Bowman,et al.  Role of PHABULOSA and PHAVOLUTA in determining radial patterning in shoots , 2001, Nature.

[14]  F. Woodward,et al.  The HIC signalling pathway links CO2 perception to stomatal development , 2000, Nature.

[15]  P. Horton,et al.  Contrasting patterns of photosynthetic acclimation to the light environment are dependent on the differential expression of the responses to altered irradiance and spectral quality. , 1998 .

[16]  Erik H. Murchie,et al.  Acclimation of photosynthesis to irradiance and spectral quality in British plant species: chlorophyll content, photosynthetic capacity and habitat preference , 1997 .

[17]  Wah Soon Chow,et al.  The grand design of photosynthesis: Acclimation of the photosynthetic apparatus to environmental cues , 1995, Photosynthesis Research.

[18]  F. Yu,et al.  Control of Paraheliotropism in Two Phaseolus Species , 1994, Plant physiology.

[19]  J. Nishio,et al.  Carbon Fixation Gradients across Spinach Leaves Do Not Follow Internal Light Gradients. , 1993, The Plant cell.

[20]  D. Sims,et al.  Response of leaf anatomy and photosynthetic capacity in Alocasia macrorrhiza (Araceae) to a transfer from low to high light. , 1992 .

[21]  R. A. Donahue,et al.  Leaf Orientation of Soybean Seedlings: II. Receptor Sites and Light Stimuli , 1990 .

[22]  J. Weyers,et al.  ACCURATE ESTIMATION OF STOMATAL APERTURE FROM SILICONE RUBBER IMPRESSIONS. , 1985, The New phytologist.

[23]  I. Terashima,et al.  Vertical Gradient in Photosynthetic Properties of Spinach Chloroplast Dependent on Intra-Leaf Light Environment , 1985 .

[24]  O. Björkman Responses to Different Quantum Flux Densities , 1981 .

[25]  P. Horton,et al.  Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress: I. Effects of drought on yield and photosynthesis. , 2006, Journal of experimental botany.

[26]  S. Peng,et al.  Acclimation of photosynthesis to high irradiance in rice: gene expression and interactions with leaf development. , 2005, Journal of experimental botany.

[27]  Thomas C. Vogelmann,et al.  Plant Tissue Optics , 1993 .

[28]  William J. Davies,et al.  Root Signals and the Regulation of Growth and Development of Plants in Drying Soil , 1991 .

[29]  J. Mullet Chloroplast Development and Gene Expression , 1988 .

[30]  W. Thomson,et al.  OBSERVATIONS ON THE MECHANISM OF CHLOROPLAST DIVISION IN HIGHER PLANTS , 1981 .

[31]  E. Salisbury On the Causes and Ecological Significance of Stomatal Frequency, with Special Reference to the Woodland Flora , 1928 .