Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine if changes in reproductive sink demand influence the partitioning of carbon within the source leaf. Temporary (Late R2‐R4) and continuous (Late R2‐R8) light and CO 2 enrichment treatments were used increase the pod number and weight on field.grown soybeans ( Glycine max L. Merr. ‘Hodgson 78’). During the last week of the temporary treatment, and at 1, 2, and 4 weeks thereafter, plants were pulse‐labeled with 14 4CO 2 at the tenth trifoliolate leaf. Leaf discs were removed at 0.5, 2, 4, 8 and 24 h after labeling and subsequently extracted for determination of 14 C in the starch, water‐soluble compounds (WSC), and residual fractions. Temporary and continuous CO 2 and light enrichment increased the reproductive sink load of field.grown soybeans at all sampling dates. On the average, total number of pods was increased 35% by light enrichment, and 38% by CO 2 enrichment. During this same period, light enrichment res~resulted in at least a 38% increase in total pod wall and seed dry weight while CO 2 enrichment resulted in a 28% increase. Light and CO 2 enrichment increased plant size during the sampling period. Leaf dry weight was increased 30% by light enrichment, and 39% by CO 2 enrichment. Stem plus petiole dry weight was increased 26% by light enrichment and 51% by CO 2 enrichment. Hence, light enrichment had a greater effect on reproductive than on vegetative growth, while CO 2 enrichment had a greater effect on vegetative than on reproductive growth. On the first sampling date, 11 August, significantly less label was incorporated and retained as starch in the light‐enriched plants. No differences were observed in the levels of 14 C‐labeled WSC or starch for the light‐enriched plants on 18 and 25 August, and during the entire experiment for the CO 2 ‐enriched plants. On 7 September, 4 weeks after removal of the temporary treatment, significantly less label was retained as WSC, starch, and residual material in the light‐enriched plants. The hypothesis that increased sink demand may influence assimilate partitioning is supported by these data.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Temporary and continuous CO2 and light enrichment increased the reproductive sink load of field-grown soybeans at all sampling dates.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- CO 2 and light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- reproductive sink loade0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Temporary and continuous CO 2 and light enrichment increased the reproductive sink load of field.grown soybeans at all sampling dates”
Claim · model-written summary
Light enrichment increased the total number of pods of soybean by 35%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- total number of podse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 35%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“total number of pods was increased 35% by light enrichment, and 38% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased the total number of pods of soybean by 38%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- total number of podse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 38%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“total number of pods was increased 35% by light enrichment, and 38% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
Light enrichment increased total pod wall and seed dry weight of soybean by at least 38%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- total pod wall and seed dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 38%e0
- Qualifier
- at leaste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“light enrichment res~resulted in at least a 38% increase in total pod wall and seed dry weight while CO 2 enrichment resulted in a 28% increase”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased total pod wall and seed dry weight of soybean by 28%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- total pod wall and seed dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 28%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“light enrichment res~resulted in at least a 38% increase in total pod wall and seed dry weight while CO 2 enrichment resulted in a 28% increase”
Claim · model-written summary
Light enrichment increased leaf dry weight of soybean by 30%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Leaf dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 30%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“Leaf dry weight was increased 30% by light enrichment, and 39% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased leaf dry weight of soybean by 39%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Leaf dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 39%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“Leaf dry weight was increased 30% by light enrichment, and 39% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
Light enrichment increased stem plus petiole dry weight of soybean by 26%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Stem plus petiole dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 26%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“Stem plus petiole dry weight was increased 26% by light enrichment and 51% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased stem plus petiole dry weight of soybean by 51%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Stem plus petiole dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 51%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“Stem plus petiole dry weight was increased 26% by light enrichment and 51% by CO 2 enrichment”
Claim · model-written summary
Light enrichment had a greater effect on reproductive than on vegetative growth of soybean.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light enrichmente0
- Outcome
- reproductive than on vegetative growthe0
- Direction
- greatere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“light enrichment had a greater effect on reproductive than on vegetative growth”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment had a greater effect on vegetative than on reproductive growth of soybean.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- vegetative than on reproductive growthe0
- Direction
- greatere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“CO 2 enrichment had a greater effect on vegetative than on reproductive growth”
Claim · model-written summary
On the first sampling date (11 August), significantly less label was incorporated and retained as starch in light-enriched soybean plants.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light‐enrichede0
- Outcome
- label was incorporated and retained as starche0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Qualifier
- significantlye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“significantly less label was incorporated and retained as starch in the light‐enriched plants”
Claim · model-written summary
No differences were observed in 14C-labeled WSC or starch for light-enriched plants on 18 and 25 August.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light‐enrichede0
- Outcome
- levels of 14 C‐labeled WSC or starche0
- Direction
- No differencese0
- Qualifier
- 18 and 25 Auguste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“No differences were observed in the levels of 14 C‐labeled WSC or starch for the light‐enriched plants on 18 and 25 August, and during the entire experiment for the CO 2 ‐enriched plants”
Claim · model-written summary
No differences were observed in 14C-labeled WSC or starch for CO2-enriched plants during the entire experiment.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- CO 2 ‐enrichede0
- Outcome
- levels of 14 C‐labeled WSC or starche0
- Direction
- No differencese0
- Qualifier
- during the entire experimente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“No differences were observed in the levels of 14 C‐labeled WSC or starch for the light‐enriched plants on 18 and 25 August, and during the entire experiment for the CO 2 ‐enriched plants”
Claim · model-written summary
On 7 September, 4 weeks after removal of the temporary treatment, significantly less label was retained as WSC, starch and residual material in light-enriched plants.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- light‐enrichede0
- Outcome
- label was retained as WSC, starch, and residual materiale0
- Direction
- lesse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean”
e0“significantly less label was retained as WSC, starch, and residual material in the light‐enriched plants”
The same questions in other papers
light · quality: sugar starch · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →co2 · quality: sugar starch · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →light · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
67 papers more in this group
See all 71 papers →light · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 papers →co2 · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
92 papers more in this group
See all 96 papers →co2 · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
82 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
97 papers more in this group
See all 101 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.