Article

Shade Avoidance Influences Stress Tolerance in Maize

[ "Postdoctoral research associate, postdoctoral research associate, graduate student, Professor, and Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada. Current address of first author: Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Greenhouse and Crops Processing Centre, 2585 County Rd. 20, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada. Corresponding author's E-mail: "]
Weed Science (Impact Factor: 1.68). 07/2011; DOI: 10.1614/WS-D-10-00159.1

ABSTRACT Previous studies have suggested that the reduction in the root/shoot ratio that accompanies the shade avoidance response may reduce the tolerance of individuals to subsequent nutrient or moisture limitations. In this work, we examined the impact of the shade avoidance response on maize seedling growth and development and the response of these plants to a subsequent abiotic stress. Seedlings were grown in a field fertigation system under two light quality environments, ambient and a low red to far-red ratio, which were designed to simulate weed-free and weedy conditions, respectively. This system also enabled the controlled restriction of water and nutrients, which reduced the relative growth rate of the crop and created a secondary stress. Results of this study indicate that, while the shade avoidance response did reduce the root/shoot ratio in maize, this effect did not reduce plant tolerance to subsequent abiotic stress. Rather, the apparent additivity or synergism of shade avoidance and the secondary stressor on yield loss depended on whether the net effect of these two stressors was sufficiently large to shift the population toward the point where reproductive allometry was broken. Nomenclature: Maize, Zea mays L.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Clarence J Swanton, Jun 29, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
258 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Environmental stresses, such as shading of the shoot, and drought and salinity of the soil, threaten plant yield and survival. Plants can alleviate the impact of these stresses through various modes of phenotypic plasticity. Here we review the current state of knowledge on the mechanisms that control plant developmental responses to shade, salt and drought stress. Plant hormones and cellular signaling pathways that control shoot branching and elongation responses to shade and root architecture modulation in response to drought and salinity are discussed. Since belowground stresses also result in changes aboveground and vice-versa, we subsequently outline how a wider palette of plant phenotypic traits is affected by the individual stresses. We argue for a research agenda that integrates multiple plant organs, responses and stresses. This will generate the scientific understanding needed for future crop improvement programs aiming at crops that can maintain yields under variable and sub-optimal conditions.
    Plant physiology 06/2014; 166(1). DOI:10.1104/pp.114.239160 · 7.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mixed cropping is practised widely in developing countries and is gaining increasing interest for sustainable agriculture in developed countries. Plants in intercrops grow differently from plants in single crops, due to interspecific plant interactions, but adaptive plant morphological responses to competition in mixed stands have not been studied in detail. Here the maize (Zea mays) response to mixed cultivation with wheat (Triticum aestivum) is described. Evidence is provided that early responses of maize to the modified light environment in mixed stands propagate throughout maize development, resulting in different phenotypes compared with pure stands. Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), red:far-red ratio (R:FR), leaf development, and final organ sizes of maize grown in three cultivation systems were compared: pure maize, an intercrop with a small distance (25cm) between maize and wheat plants, and an intercop with a large distance (44cm) between the maize and the wheat. Compared with maize in pure stands, maize in the mixed stands had lower leaf and collar appearance rates, increased blade and sheath lengths at low ranks and smaller sizes at high ranks, increased blade elongation duration, and decreased R:FR and PAR at the plant base during early development. Effects were strongest in the treatment with a short distance between wheat and maize strips. The data suggest a feedback between leaf initiation and leaf emergence at the plant level and coordination between blade and sheath growth at the phytomer level. A conceptual model, based on coordination rules, is proposed to explain the development of the maize plant in pure and mixed stands.
    Journal of Experimental Botany 12/2013; 65(2). DOI:10.1093/jxb/ert408 · 5.79 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Control of early-emerging weeds is essential to protect the yield potential of maize. An understanding of the physiological changes that occur as a result of weed interference is required to address variability in yield loss across sites and years. Field trials were conducted at the University of Guelph (UG), the Ohio State University (OSU), and Colorado State University (CSU) during 2009 and 2010. There were six treatments (season-long weedy and weed-free, and weed control at the 1st-, 3rd-, 5th-, and 10th-leaf-tip stages of maize development) and 20 individual plants per plot were harvested at maturity. We hypothesized that, as weed control was delayed, weed interference in the early stages of maize development would increase plant-to-plant variability in plant dry-matter accumulation, which would result in a reduction of grain yield at maturity. The onset of the critical period for weed control (CPWC) occurred on average between the third and fifth leaf tip stages of development (i.e., V1 to V3, respectively). Rate of yield loss following the onset of the CPWC ranged from 0.05 MG ha21 d21 at UG 2009 to 0.22 MG ha21 d21 at CSU 2010 (i.e., 0.5 and 1.6% d21, respectively). On average, reductions in kernel number per plant accounted for approximately 65% of the decline in grain yield as weed control was delayed. Biomass partitioning to the grain was stable through early weed removal treatments, increased and peaked at the 10th-leaf-tip time of control, and decreased in the season-long weedy treatment. Plant-to-plant variability in dry matter at maturity and incidence of bareness increased as weed control was delayed. As weed control was delayed, the contribution of plant-to-plant variability at maturity to the overall yield loss was small, relative to the decline of mean plant dry matter.
    Weed Science 07/2012; 60:423. DOI:10.1614/WS-D-11-00183.1 · 1.68 Impact Factor