Paper · 1992 · Plant Cell & Environment

Modelling photosynthesis of cotton grown in elevated CO2

P. C. HARLEY; R. B. THOMAS; J. F. REYNOLDS; et al.

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
778
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

ABSTRACT Cotton plants were grown in CO 2 ‐controlled growth chambers in atmospheres of either 35 or 65 Pa CO 2 . A widely accepted model of C 3 leaf photosynthesis was parameterized for leaves from both CO 2 treatments using non‐linear least squares regression techniques, but in order to achieve reasonable fits, it was necessary to include a phosphate limitation resulting from inadequate triose phosphate utilization. Despite the accumulation of large amounts of starch (>50 g m −2 ) in the high CO 2 plants, the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves in both treatments were similar, although the maximum rate of Rubisco activity (Vc max ), estimated from A versus C i response curves measured at 29°C, was ∼10% lower in leaves from plants grown in high CO 2 . The relationship between key model parameters and total leaf N was linear, the only difference between CO 2 treatments being a slight reduction in the slope of the line relating Vc max to leaf N in plants grown at high CO 2 . Stomatal conductance of leaves of plants grown and measured at 65 Pa CO 2 was approximately 32% lower than that of plants grown and measured at 35 Pa. Because photosynthetic capacity of leaves grown in high CO 2 was only slightly less than that of leaves grown in 35 Pa CO 2 , net photosynthesis measured at the growth CO 2 , light and temperature conditions was approximately 25% greater in leaves of plants grown in high CO 2 , despite the reduction in leaf conductance. Greater assimilation rate was one factor allowing plants grown in high CO 2 to incorporate 30% more biomass during the first 36 d of growth.

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 9

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Reasonable model fits required a phosphate limitation from inadequate triose phosphate use.

Outcome
reasonable fitse0
Qualifier
phosphate limitatione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in order to achieve reasonable fits, it was necessary to include a phosphate limitation resulting from inadequate triose phosphate utilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 278–420 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 cotton accumulated starch above 50 g m −2.

Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
accumulation of large amounts of starche0
Value
>50 g m −2e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the accumulation of large amounts of starch (>50 g m −2 ) in the high CO 2 plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 430–511 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Photosynthetic characteristics were similar across CO2 treatments.

Treatment
both treatmentse0
Outcome
photosynthetic characteristics of leavese0
Direction
similare0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves in both treatments were similar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 513–589 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Estimated maximum Rubisco activity was about 10% lower under high CO2.

Treatment
high CO 2e0
Gene
Rubiscoe0
Outcome
maximum rate of Rubisco activitye0
Direction
lowere0
Value
∼10%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the maximum rate of Rubisco activity (Vc max ), estimated from A versus C i response curves measured at 29°C, was ∼10% lower in leaves from plants grown in high CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 600–765 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Key model parameters related linearly to total leaf nitrogen.

Organ / stage
leafe0
Outcome
relationship between key model parameters and total leaf Ne0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The relationship between key model parameters and total leaf N was linear”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–841 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 slightly reduced the slope relating Vc max to leaf nitrogen.

Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
slope of the line relating Vc max to leaf Ne0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a slight reduction in the slope of the line relating Vc max to leaf N in plants grown at high CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 893–991 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stomatal conductance under 65 Pa CO2 was approximately 32% lower than under 35 Pa.

Treatment
65 Pa CO 2e0
Outcome
Stomatal conductancee0
Direction
lowere0
Value
32%e0
Comparator
35 Pae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Stomatal conductance of leaves of plants grown and measured at 65 Pa CO 2 was approximately 32% lower than that of plants grown and measured at 35 Pa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 994–1143 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net photosynthesis at growth conditions was approximately 25% greater under high CO2.

Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
net photosynthesise0
Direction
greatere0
Value
25%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“net photosynthesis measured at the growth CO 2 , light and temperature conditions was approximately 25% greater in leaves of plants grown in high CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1271–1421 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 cotton incorporated 30% more biomass in the first 36 days.

Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
biomasse0
Direction
moree0
Value
30%e0
Qualifier
during the first 36 d of growthe0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“plants grown in high CO 2 to incorporate 30% more biomass during the first 36 d of growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1517–1606 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–34 · show in text ↑

co2 · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

23 papers: 18 positive, 5 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 papers →

co2 · physiology: photosynthesis · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 9 positive, 3 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.