Abstract
Reducing nitrogen (N) application can improve nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and mitigate environmental pollution. However, this reduction often adversely affects photosynthesis and leads to inhibition of wheat growth. Thus, exploring effective agronomic measures to improve wheat’s tolerance to low N is essential for balancing the conflict between N reduction and wheat growth. Drought priming has been proven to enhance plant stress tolerance, but its role and mechanisms in improving photosynthetic capacity under low N stress remain unclear. The effects of drought priming on wheat growth and photosynthesis were investigated under low N stress using hydroponic experiments with two wheat varieties, YM158 (low N-tolerant) and YM25 (low N-sensitive). The results showed that low N stress significantly inhibited biomass accumulation, whereas drought priming effectively alleviated this growth inhibition. Drought priming significantly increased the net photosynthetic rate ( P n ) of both cultivars compared to non-primed treatments under low N stress, which was primarily associated with enhanced Rubisco maximum carboxylation rate ( V cmax) and activities of Rubisco and Rubisco activase (RCA). Furthermore, drought priming promoted triose phosphate (TP) utilization and upregulated the expression of sugar transporter genes, which reduced sucrose accumulation in leaves and consequently alleviated its feedback inhibition on photosynthesis. In summary, drought priming enhances phloem loading-driven sucrose transport, reduces leaf sucrose accumulation, and improves Rubisco activation, collectively alleviating photosynthetic feedback inhibition and sustaining stronger photosynthetic capacity under low N stress.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Low N significantly inhibited wheat biomass accumulation.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- low N stresse0
- Outcome
- biomass accumulatione0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“low N stress significantly inhibited biomass accumulation”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought priming alleviated low N growth inhibition.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- drought priminge0
- Outcome
- growth inhibitione0
- Direction
- alleviatede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“drought priming effectively alleviated this growth inhibition”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Priming increased net photosynthetic rate in both cultivars relative to non-primed treatments under low N.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Drought priminge0
- Outcome
- net photosynthetic rate ( P n )e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- under low N stresse0
- Comparator
- non-primed treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought priming significantly increased the net photosynthetic rate ( P n ) of both cultivars compared to non-primed treatments under low N stress”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Priming enhanced Rubisco maximum carboxylation rate and Rubisco and RCA activities.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Drought priminge1
- Outcome
- Rubisco maximum carboxylation rate ( V cmax) and activities of Rubisco and Rubisco activase (RCA)e0
- Direction
- enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhanced Rubisco maximum carboxylation rate ( V cmax) and activities of Rubisco and Rubisco activase (RCA)”
e1“Drought priming significantly increased”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought priming promoted triose phosphate utilization.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- drought priminge0
- Outcome
- triose phosphate (TP) utilizatione0
- Direction
- promotede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“drought priming promoted triose phosphate (TP) utilization”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought priming upregulated sugar transporter gene expression.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- drought priminge0
- Gene
- sugar transporter genese0
- Outcome
- expression of sugar transporter genese0
- Direction
- upregulatede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“drought priming promoted triose phosphate (TP) utilization and upregulated the expression of sugar transporter genes”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Priming reduced sucrose accumulation in leaves.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- drought priminge1
- Outcome
- sucrose accumulation in leavese0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced sucrose accumulation in leaves”
e1“drought priming promoted”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced leaf sucrose was linked to alleviation of feedback inhibition on photosynthesis.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- feedback inhibition on photosynthesise0
- Direction
- alleviatede0
- Qualifier
- reduced sucrose accumulation in leavese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced sucrose accumulation in leaves and consequently alleviated its feedback inhibition on photosynthesis”
t0“wheat”
The same questions in other papers
seed treatment · molecular: expression · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →drought · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →seed treatment · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 papers →seed treatment · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
48 papers more in this group
See all 52 papers →seed treatment · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
66 papers more in this group
See all 70 papers →drought · molecular: expression · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
73 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
94 papers more in this group
See all 98 papers →drought · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
55 papers in the same direction as this paper · 69 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
121 papers more in this group
See all 125 papers →drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 204 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
242 papers more in this group
See all 246 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.