This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Web of Science (119) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chatterton, N. J. Articles by Silvius, J. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chatterton, N. J. Articles by Silvius, J. E. Agricola Articles by Chatterton, N. J. Articles by Silvius, J. E.

Articles

Photosynthate Partitioning into Starch in Soybean Leaves

I. Effects of Photoperiod versus Photosynthetic Period Duration

Light and Plant Growth Laboratory, Plant Physiology Institute, United States Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration, Agricultural Research, Beltsville, Maryland 20705

Photosynthesis, photosynthate partitioning into foliar starch, and translocation were investigated in soybean plants (Glycine max (L.) Merr. cv. Amsoy 71), grown under different photoperiods and photosynthetic periods to determine the controls of leaf starch accumulation. Starch accumulation rates in soybean leaves were inversely related to the length of the daily photosynthetic period under which the plants were grown. Photosynthetic period and not photoperiod per se appears to be the important factor. Plants grown in a 14-hour photosynthetic period partitioned approximately 60% of the daily foliar accumulation into starch whereas 7-hour plants partitioned about 90% of their daily foliar accumulation into starch. The difference in starch accumulation resulted from a change in photosynthate partitioning between starch and leaf residual dry weight. Residual dry weight is defined as leaf dry weight minus the weight of total nonstructural carbohydrates. Differences in photosynthate partitioning into starch were also associated with changes in photosynthetic and translocation rates, as well as with leaf and whole plant morphology. It is concluded that leaf starch accumulation is a programmed process and not simply the result of a limitation in translocation.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. J. Reidel, R. Turgeon, and L. Cheng A Maltose Transporter from Apple is Expressed in Source and Sink Tissues and Complements the Arabidopsis Maltose Export-Defective Mutant Plant Cell Physiol., October 1, 2008; 49(10): 1607 - 1613. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Usadel, O. E. Blasing, Y. Gibon, K. Retzlaff, M. Hohne, M. Gunther, and M. Stitt Global Transcript Levels Respond to Small Changes of the Carbon Status during Progressive Exhaustion of Carbohydrates in Arabidopsis Rosettes Plant Physiology, April 1, 2008; 146(4): 1834 - 1861. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Cross, M. von Korff, T. Altmann, L. Bartzetko, R. Sulpice, Y. Gibon, N. Palacios, and M. Stitt Variation of Enzyme Activities and Metabolite Levels in 24 Arabidopsis Accessions Growing in Carbon-Limited Conditions Plant Physiology, December 1, 2006; 142(4): 1574 - 1588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Lu, J. P. Gehan, and T. D. Sharkey Daylength and Circadian Effects on Starch Degradation and Maltose Metabolism Plant Physiology, August 1, 2005; 138(4): 2280 - 2291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. BUNCE A Comparison of the Effects of Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Temperature on Respiration, Translocation and Nitrate Reduction in Darkened Soybean Leaves Ann. Bot., June 1, 2004; 93(6): 665 - 669. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L. Harmer, J. B. Hogenesch, M. Straume, H.-S. Chang, B. Han, T. Zhu, X. Wang, J. A. Kreps, and S. A. Kay Orchestrated Transcription of Key Pathways in Arabidopsis by the Circadian Clock Science, December 15, 2000; 290(5499): 2110 - 2113. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. Sun, T. W. Okita, and G. E. Edwards Modification of Carbon Partitioning, Photosynthetic Capacity, and O2 Sensitivity in Arabidopsis Plants with Low ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylase Activity Plant Physiology, January 1, 1999; 119(1): 267 - 276. [Abstract] [Full Text]