Fonteyne S, Muylle H, Lootens P, Kerchev P, Van den Ende W, Staelens A, Reheul D, Roldán-Ruiz I. Physiological basis of chilling tolerance and early-season growth in miscanthus.
Ann Bot 2018;
121:281-295. [PMID:
29300823 PMCID:
PMC5808799 DOI:
10.1093/aob/mcx159]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2017] [Accepted: 10/26/2017] [Indexed: 05/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The high productivity of Miscanthus × giganteus has been at least partly ascribed to its high chilling tolerance compared with related C4 crops, allowing for a longer productive growing season in temperate climates. However, the chilling tolerance of M. × giganteus has been predominantly studied under controlled environmental conditions. The understanding of the underlying mechanisms contributing to chilling tolerance in the field and their variation in different miscanthus genotypes is largely unexplored.
METHODS
Five miscanthus genotypes with different sensitivities to chilling were grown in the field and scored for a comprehensive set of physiological traits throughout the spring season. Chlorophyll fluorescence was measured as an indication of photosynthesis, and leaf samples were analysed for biochemical traits related to photosynthetic activity (chlorophyll content and pyruvate, Pi dikinase activity), redox homeostasis (malondialdehyde, glutathione and ascorbate contents, and catalase activity) and water-soluble carbohydrate content.
KEY RESULTS
Chilling-tolerant genotypes were characterized by higher levels of malondialdehyde, raffinose and sucrose, and higher catalase activity, while the chilling-sensitive genotypes were characterized by higher concentrations of glucose and fructose, and higher pyruvate, Pi dikinase activity later in the growing season. On the early sampling dates, the biochemical responses of M. × giganteus were similar to those of the chilling-tolerant genotypes, but later in the season they became more similar to those of the chilling-sensitive genotypes.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall physiological response of chilling-tolerant genotypes was distinguishable from that of chilling-sensitive genotypes, while M. × giganteus was intermediate between the two. There appears to be a trade-off between high and efficient photosynthesis and chilling stress tolerance. Miscanthus × giganteus is able to overcome this trade-off and, while it is more similar to the chilling-sensitive genotypes in early spring, its photosynthetic capacity is similar to that of the chilling-tolerant genotypes later on.
Collapse