Abstract
Abstract The effects of CO 2 enrichment on the growth and physiology of maize were investigated at the molecular, biochemical, leaf, and canopy levels. Maize plants were grown in sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chambers at ambient (370 μmol mol −1 ) or elevated (750 μmol mol −1 ) atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration ( C a ) under well‐watered and fertilized conditions. Canopy gas exchange rates and leaf temperatures were monitored continuously during the growing season. CO 2 enrichment did not enhance the growth or canopy photosynthesis of maize plants. However, canopy evapotranspiration rates decreased by 22% and daytime leaf temperatures were increased about 1°C in response to CO 2 enrichment. Leaf carboxylation efficiency and leaf nitrogen concentration also decreased at elevated C a . Transcription profiling using maize cDNA microarrays revealed that approximately 5% of tested genes responded to CO 2 enrichment. Of the altered transcripts, several were known to encode proteins involved in stomatal development or photosynthesis. For the majority of the altered transcripts, however, it was difficult to link their functions with specific physiological factors partly because many of these genes encoded unknown proteins. We conclude that maize did not exhibit enhanced growth or photosynthesis in response to CO 2 enrichment but a number of molecular and physiological processes including those involved in stomatal relations were affected by growth in elevated C a .
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment did not enhance the growth or canopy photosynthesis of maize.
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente1
- Outcome
- growth or canopy photosynthesise1
- Direction
- did not enhancee1
- Comparator
- ambiente0
- Setting
- sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chamberse0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize plants were grown in sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chambers at ambient (370 μmol mol −1 ) or elevated (750 μmol mol −1 )”
e1“CO 2 enrichment did not enhance the growth or canopy photosynthesis of maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment decreased canopy evapotranspiration rates of maize by 22%.
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente3
- Outcome
- canopy evapotranspiration ratese2
- Direction
- decreasede2
- Value
- 22%e2
- Comparator
- ambiente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“Maize plants were grown in sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chambers at ambient (370 μmol mol −1 ) or elevated (750 μmol mol −1 )”
e2“canopy evapotranspiration rates decreased by 22%”
e3“daytime leaf temperatures were increased about 1°C in response to CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased daytime leaf temperatures of maize by about 1°C.
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente3
- Outcome
- daytime leaf temperaturese3
- Direction
- increasede3
- Value
- about 1°Ce3
- Comparator
- ambiente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“Maize plants were grown in sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chambers at ambient (370 μmol mol −1 ) or elevated (750 μmol mol −1 )”
e3“daytime leaf temperatures were increased about 1°C in response to CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 decreased leaf carboxylation efficiency and leaf nitrogen concentration of maize.
- Treatment
- elevated C ae4
- Outcome
- Leaf carboxylation efficiency and leaf nitrogen concentratione4
- Direction
- decreasede4
- Comparator
- ambiente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“Maize plants were grown in sunlit soil–plant–atmosphere research (SPAR) chambers at ambient (370 μmol mol −1 ) or elevated (750 μmol mol −1 )”
e4“Leaf carboxylation efficiency and leaf nitrogen concentration also decreased at elevated C a”
Claim · model-written summary
About 5% of the tested maize genes responded to CO2 enrichment.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e5“approximately 5% of tested genes responded to CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
Among the transcripts altered by CO2 enrichment in maize, several encode proteins involved in stomatal development or photosynthesis.
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente5
- Outcome
- altered transcriptse6
- Qualifier
- encode proteins involved in stomatal development or photosynthesise6
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e5“approximately 5% of tested genes responded to CO 2 enrichment”
e6“Of the altered transcripts, several were known to encode proteins involved in stomatal development or photosynthesis”
The same questions in other papers
co2 · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.