Comparative studies of C3 and C4 Atriplex hybrids in the genomics era: Physiological assessments

31Citations
Citations of this article
79Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We crossed the C3 species Atriplex prostrata with the C 4 species Atriplex rosea to produce F1 and F2 hybrids. All hybrids exhibited C3-like δ13C values, and had reduced rates of net CO2 assimilation compared with A. prostrata. The activities of the major C4 cycle enzymes PEP carboxylase, NAD-malic enzyme, and pyruvate-Pi dikinase in the hybrids were at most 36% of the C4 values. These results demonstrate the C4 metabolic cycle was disrupted in the hybrids. Photosynthetic CO2 compensation points (ρ) of the hybrids were generally midway between the C3 and C4 values, and in most hybrids were accompanied by low, C 3-like activities in one or more of the major C4 cycle enzymes. This supports the possibility that most hybrids use a photorespiratory glycine shuttle to concentrate CO2 into the bundle sheath cells. One hybrid exhibited a C4-like § of 4 μmol mol-1, indicating engagement of a C4 metabolic cycle. Consistently, this hybrid had elevated activities of all measured C4 cycle enzymes relative to the C3 parent; however, C3-like carbon isotope ratios indicate the low is mainly due to a photorespiratory glycine shuttle. The anatomy of the hybrids resembled that of C3-C4 intermediate species using a glycine shuttle to concentrate CO2 in the bundle sheath, and is further evidence that this physiology is the predominant, default condition of the F2 hybrids. Progeny of these hybrids should further segregate C3 and C4 traits and in doing so assist in the discovery of C4 genes using high-throughput methods of the genomics era. © 2014 The Author.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Oakley, J. C., Sultmanis, S., Stinson, C. R., Sage, T. L., & Sage, R. F. (2014). Comparative studies of C3 and C4 Atriplex hybrids in the genomics era: Physiological assessments. Journal of Experimental Botany, 65(13), 3637–3647. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eru106

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free