INFLUENCE OF INCREASED ATMOSPHERIC NH3 ON PHYSIOLOGY INDEX AND BIOMASS OF MAIZE WITH DIFFERENT N EFFICIENCY

doi:10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.01.024

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims The main aim of this study was to investigate the response of various physiology indexes, e.g., chlorophyll index value (stand for the relative content of chlorophyll, SPAD value), net photosynthetic rate (P_n), stomatal conductance (G_s), and root shoot ratio (R/S) in two genetypes of maize (Zea mays) to NH₃ concentration enrichment.
Methods We grew maize on Hoagland solution in PVC pots in open top chambers (OTCs). The experiment was a split-split plot design, which main treatments were two NH₃ concentrations (10 and 1 000 nl·L^-1). The sub-plot treatments of the experiment were two levels of nitrogen (high and low), and sub-sub-plot treatments were two N efficiency genotypes (high N efficiency, ‘NE5’, and low N efficiency, ‘SD19’). Air flow in OTCs was controlled by small fans and atmospheric NH₃ concentration was measured accurately by two methods (NH₃ determination tubes and GTL-C atmosphere detecting apparatus).
Important findings Under elevated atmospheric NH₃, there were significant differences (p<0. 05) for physiology indexes between the two varieties, ‘NE5’ and ‘SD19’. Under high N medium, compared with 10 nl·L^-1 atmospheric NH₃ concentration, the SPAD value, P_n and G_s of ‘NE5’ treated with 1 000 nl·L^-1 decreased 7.0%, 14.0% and 6.5%, respectively, and the corresponding targets of ‘SD19’ decreased 9.0%, 11.0% and 6.9%, respectively. Under low N medium, various physiology indexes of the two varieties significantly increased, i.e., the SPAD value, P_n and G_s of ‘NE5’ increased 5.7%, 7.1% and 17%, respectively, and the relative value of ‘SD19’ increased 7.0%, 11.0% and 22.0%, respectively. The results also demonstrated that under high N medium, the inhibition effect of increased atmospheric NH₃ on ‘SD19’ shoot biomass was obviously lower than that of ‘NE5’, while under low N medium, NH₃ concentration enrichment had more positive influence on ‘NE5’ (p<0. 05) than ‘SD19’. Moreover, the ratio of roots to shoots of ‘NE5’ and ‘SD19’ in the two atmospheric NH₃ concentrations was related to maize growth periods, i.e., there were different changes for their root and shoot biomass in three sampling time, but still obeying certain laws. All these results indicated that the absorbed atmospheric NH₃ by plants can improve crop nitrogen nutrition growing in low N medium, and there may be more significantly positive effect on low nitrogen efficiency genotypes.

Key words: Zea mays, NH₃ concentration enrichment, N efficiency, genotypes, physiology indexes

CHEN Xiao-Li, LI Shi-Qing, REN Xiao-Long, QIANG Hong, JI Chun-Rong, YAN Deng-Ming. INFLUENCE OF INCREASED ATMOSPHERIC NH₃ ON PHYSIOLOGY INDEX AND BIOMASS OF MAIZE WITH DIFFERENT N EFFICIENCY[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2008, 32(1): 204-211.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.01.024

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2008/V32/I1/204

Figures/Tables 4

References 23

[1]	Beat H, Albrecht N (2002). Ammonia exchange with grasslands. Agrarforschung, 9, 280-285.
[2]	Dueck ThA, Dorèl FG, ter Horst R, van der Eerden LJ (1990). Effects of ammonia, ammonium sulphate and sulphur dioxide on the frost sensitivity of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 54, 33-49.
[3]	Fangmeier A, Hadwiger-Fangmeier A, van der Eerden LJ (1994). Effects of atmospheric ammonia on vegetation—a review. Environmental Pollution, 86, 43-82.
[4]	Hanstein S, Mattsson M, Jaeger HJ (1999). Uptake and utilization of atmospheric ammonia in three native Poaceae species: leaf conductance, composition of apoplastic solution and interactions with root nitrogen supply. New Phytologist, 141, 71-83.
[5]	Hegg DA, Radke LF, Hobbs PV (1990). Emissions of some trace gases from biomass fires. Journal of Geophysical Research, 95, 560-567.
[6]	Husted S, Schjoerring JK (1996). Ammonia flux between oilseed rape plant and the atmosphere in response to changes in leaf temperature, light intensity, and air humidity. Plant Physiology, 112, 67-74.
[7]	Krupa SV (2003). Effects of atmospheric ammonia (NH₃) on terrestrial vegetation: a review. Environmental Pollution, 124, 179-221.
[8]	Li SX (李生秀), Li ZR (李宗让), Tian XH (田霄鸿), Wang ZH (王朝辉) (1995). Nitrogen loss from above-ground plants by volatilization. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Sciences (植物营养与肥料学报), 1(2), 18-25. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	Li SQ (李世清), Zhao L (赵琳), Shao MA (邵明安), Zhang XC (张兴昌), Shangguan ZP (上官周平) (2004). Ammonia exchange between plant canopy and the atmosphere—a review. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica (西北植物学报), 24, 2154-2162. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	Lockyer DR, Whitehead DC (1986). The uptake of gaseous ammonia by the leaves of Italian ryegrass. Journal of Experimental Botany, 37, 919-927.
[11]	Mengel K, Kirkby EA (1987). Principles of Plant Nutrition. International Potash Institute, Bern, Switzerland, 347-384.
[12]	Nadelhoffer KJ, Emmett BA, Gundersen P (1999). Nitrogen deposition makes a minor contribution to carbon sequestration in temperate forests. Nature, 398, 145-147.
[13]	O'Deen WA, Porter LK (1986). Continuous flow system for collecting volatile ammonia and amines from senescing winter wheat. Agronomy Journal, 78, 746-749.
[14]	Pearson J, Srewart GR (1993). The deposition of atmospheric ammonia and its effects on plants. New Phytologist, 125, 283-305.
[15]	Peng S, Garcia FV, Laza RC (1993). Adjustments for specific leaf weight improve chlorophyll meter's estimate of rice leaf nitrogen concentration. Agronomy Journal, 85, 987-990.
[16]	Pérez-Soba M, van der Eerden LJM (1993). Nitrogen uptake in needles of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) when exposed to gaseous ammonia and ammonium fertilizer in the soil. Plant and Soil, 153, 231-242.
[17]	Schjoerring JK, Poulsen MM, Husted S (1998). Soil-plant-atmosphere ammonia exchange associated with Calluna vulgaris and Deschampsia flexuosa. Atmospheric Environment, 32, 507-512.
[18]	van der Eerden LJM, Pérez-Soba M (1992). Physiological responses of Pinus sylvestris to atmospheric ammonia. Trees, 6, 48-53.
[19]	van Hove LWA, Van Kooten O, Van Wijk KJ, Vredenberg WJ, Aderna EH, Pieters GA (1991). Physiological effects of long term exposure to low concentrations of SO₂ and NH₃ on poplar leaves. Physiologia Plantarum, 82, 32-40.
[20]	Wedin DA, Tilman D (1996). Influence of nitrogen loading and species composition on the carbon balance of grasslands. Science, 274, 1720-1723.
[21]	Wang ZH (王朝辉), Tian XH (田霄鸿), Li SX (李生秀) (2001). Nitrogen losses from winter wheat plant by NH₃ volatilization in late growing stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica (作物学报), 27, 1-6. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	Yin B, Shen RF, Zhu ZL (1996). Use of new water soluble film-forming material to ammonia loss from water solution. Pedosphere, 6, 329-334.
[23]	Zhao P (赵平), Sun GC (孙谷畴), Zeng XP (曾小平), Cai XA (蔡锡安), Peng SL (彭少麟) (2003). Variations of photosynthetic parameters in leaves of acacia auriculaeformis grown in different nitrogen sources under increased atmospheric NH₃. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 23, 1386-1394. (in English with Chinese abstract)

基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	SPAD值 SPAD value							P_n (μmol CO₂·m^-2·s^-1)							G_s (mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20		6月30日 June 30		平均 Average		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20		6月30日 June 30		平均 Average		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20	6月30日 June 30	平均 Average
		高供氮介质 High N medium
NE5	10	43.6		45.4		47.1		45.4^a	23.6		25.8		26.5		25.3^b	0.20	0.24	0.26	0.23^b
SD19	10	38.2		40.0		42.3		40.2^b	26.3		29.1		29.8		28.4^a	0.28	0.32	0.33	0.31^a
NE5	1 000	40.1		42.1		44.5		42.2^a	19.9		21.8		23.6		21.8^b	0.11	0.14	0.18	0.14^b
SD19	1 000	34.7		36.6		38.4		36.6^b	22.3		25.6		28.0		25.3^a	0.27	0.31	0.29	0.29^a
		低供氮介质 Low N medium
NE5	10	37.6		39.6		41.6		39.6^a	21.0		23.3		26.4		23.6^a	0.17	0.19	0.22	0.19^a
SD19	10	33.9		35.9		37.9		35.9^a	17.5		19.3		21.5		19.4^b	0.11	0.13	0.18	0.14^a
NE5	1 000	40.0		42.0		44.0		42.0^a	22.1		25.3		28.8		25.4^a	0.19	0.24	0.26	0.23^a
SD19	1 000	36.3		38.3		40.3		38.3^b	18.9		21.8		24.3		21.7^b	0.15	0.18	0.21	0.18^b

基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	SPAD值 SPAD value							P_n (μmol CO₂·m^-2·s^-1)							G_s (mmol·m^-2·s^-1)
基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20		6月30日 June 30		平均 Average		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20		6月30日 June 30		平均 Average		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20	6月30日 June 30	平均 Average
		高供氮介质 High N medium
NE5	10	43.6		45.4		47.1		45.4^a	23.6		25.8		26.5		25.3^b	0.20	0.24	0.26	0.23^b
SD19	10	38.2		40.0		42.3		40.2^b	26.3		29.1		29.8		28.4^a	0.28	0.32	0.33	0.31^a
NE5	1 000	40.1		42.1		44.5		42.2^a	19.9		21.8		23.6		21.8^b	0.11	0.14	0.18	0.14^b
SD19	1 000	34.7		36.6		38.4		36.6^b	22.3		25.6		28.0		25.3^a	0.27	0.31	0.29	0.29^a
		低供氮介质 Low N medium
NE5	10	37.6		39.6		41.6		39.6^a	21.0		23.3		26.4		23.6^a	0.17	0.19	0.22	0.19^a
SD19	10	33.9		35.9		37.9		35.9^a	17.5		19.3		21.5		19.4^b	0.11	0.13	0.18	0.14^a
NE5	1 000	40.0		42.0		44.0		42.0^a	22.1		25.3		28.8		25.4^a	0.19	0.24	0.26	0.23^a
SD19	1 000	36.3		38.3		40.3		38.3^b	18.9		21.8		24.3		21.7^b	0.15	0.18	0.21	0.18^b

基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	测定日期 Determination time
		6月10日 June 10			6月20日 June 20			6月30日 June 30
		根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total	根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total	根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total
		高供氮介质 High N medium
NE5	10	0.15^a	0.44^a	0.59^a	5.75^a	9.49^a	15.24^a	50.90^a	246.36^a	297.26^a
SD19	10	0.24^b	0.65^b	0.89^b	5.97^b	12.4^b	18.37^b	34.82^b	194.55^b	229.37^b
NE5	1 000	0.14^a	0.36^a	0.50^a	5.44^a	8.83^a	14.27^a	44.26^a	207.33^a	251.59^a
SD19	1 000	0.22^b	0.61^b	0.83^b	5.61^b	11.7^b	17.31^b	24.12^b	164.53^b	188.65^b
						低供氮介质 Low N medium
NE5	10	0.19^a	0.46^a	0.65^a	6.33^a	10.04^a	16.37^a	36.8^a	147.74^a	184.54^a
SD19	10	0.17^b	0.34^b	0.51^b	5.89^b	9.62^a	15.51^a	37.3^a	125.50^b	162.80^b
NE5	1 000	0.21^a	0.50^a	0.71^a	6.67^a	11.60^a	18.27^a	39.5^a	156.16^a	195.66^a
SD19	1 000	0.19^b	0.43^b	0.62^b	6.22^b	9.80^b	16.02^b	44.8^b	134.83^b	179.63^b

基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	测定日期 Determination time
		6月10日 June 10			6月20日 June 20			6月30日 June 30
		根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total	根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total	根系 Roots	茎叶 Shoots	总量 Total
		高供氮介质 High N medium
NE5	10	0.15^a	0.44^a	0.59^a	5.75^a	9.49^a	15.24^a	50.90^a	246.36^a	297.26^a
SD19	10	0.24^b	0.65^b	0.89^b	5.97^b	12.4^b	18.37^b	34.82^b	194.55^b	229.37^b
NE5	1 000	0.14^a	0.36^a	0.50^a	5.44^a	8.83^a	14.27^a	44.26^a	207.33^a	251.59^a
SD19	1 000	0.22^b	0.61^b	0.83^b	5.61^b	11.7^b	17.31^b	24.12^b	164.53^b	188.65^b
						低供氮介质 Low N medium
NE5	10	0.19^a	0.46^a	0.65^a	6.33^a	10.04^a	16.37^a	36.8^a	147.74^a	184.54^a
SD19	10	0.17^b	0.34^b	0.51^b	5.89^b	9.62^a	15.51^a	37.3^a	125.50^b	162.80^b
NE5	1 000	0.21^a	0.50^a	0.71^a	6.67^a	11.60^a	18.27^a	39.5^a	156.16^a	195.66^a
SD19	1 000	0.19^b	0.43^b	0.62^b	6.22^b	9.80^b	16.02^b	44.8^b	134.83^b	179.63^b

基因型 Genotype	NH₃浓度 NH₃ concentration (nl·L^-1)	根冠比 Ratio of roots and shoots
		高供氮介质 High N medium							低供氮介质 Low N medium
		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20		6月30日 June 30		平均 Average		6月10日 June 10	6月20日 June 20	6月30日 June 30	平均 Average
NE5	10	0.37		0.61		0.20		0.39^a	0.42	0.63	0.24	0.43^a
SD19	10	0.36		0.44		0.18		0.33^b	0.49	0.61	0.30	0.47^a
NE5	1 000	0.40		0.62		0.21		0.41^a	0.42	0.58	0.23	0.42^a
SD19	1 000	0.36		0.44		0.15		0.32^b	0.44	0.63	0.33	0.47^a

INFLUENCE OF INCREASED ATMOSPHERIC NH₃ ON PHYSIOLOGY INDEX AND BIOMASS OF MAIZE WITH DIFFERENT N EFFICIENCY

FullText

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 4

References 23

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles 0

Metrics

Comments

	p值 p value
	NH₃×N	NH₃×G	N×G	NH₃×N×G
SPAD值 SPAD value	<0.001	0.583	0.882	0.586
P_n (μmol CO₂·m^-2·s^-1)	0.097	0.600	0.029	0.009
G_s (mmol·m^-2·s^-1)	0.097	0.600	0.029	0.009
根冠比 Ratio of roots to shoots (R/C)	<0.001	0.871	<0.001	0.184

[1]	CHEN Chan, ZHANG Shi-Ji, LI Lei-Da, LIU Zhao-Dan, CHEN Jin-Lei, GU Xiang, WANG Liu-Fang, FANG Xi. Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in leaf, litter and soil at different vegetation restoration stages in the mid-subtropical region of China [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2019, 43(8): 658-671.
[2]	SHEN Fang-Fang, LI Yan-Yan, LIU Wen-Fei, DUAN Hong-Lang, FAN Hou-Bao, HU Liang, MENG Qing-Yin. Responses of nitrogen and phosphorus resorption from leaves and branches to long-term nitrogen deposition in a Chinese fir plantation [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2018, 42(9): 926-937.
[3]	SHEN Ao, ZHU Jiao-Jun, YAN Tao, LU De-Liang, YANG Kai. Effects of leaf nutrient concentration and resorption on leaf falling time of dominant broadleaved species in a montane region of eastern Liaoning Province, China [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2018, 42(5): 573-584.
[4]	Jin-Qiang LIU, Zhi-Guo CAO, Huan-Huan LIU, Shao-Wei ZHANG, Li-Ming JIA, Zhong-Kui JIA, Ben-Ye XI. Ultrasonic based investigation on particle size distribution and retention efficiency of particulate matters retained on tree leaves—Taking Ginkgo biloba and Pinus tabuliformis as examples [J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2016, 40(8): 798-809.
[5]	Dan WANG, Yun-Zhou QIAO, Bao-Di DONG, Jing GE, Ping-Guo YANG, Meng-Yu LIU. Differential effects of diurnal asymmetric and symmetric warming on yield and water utilization of soybean [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2016, 40(8): 827-833.
[6]	Wen-Sai ZHAO, Yong-Lin SUN, Xi-Ping LIU. Effects of drought-rewatering-drought on photosynthesis and growth of maize [J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2016, 40(6): 594-603.
[7]	WANG Yan-Zhe, SHAO Li-Wei, LIU Xiu-Wei, ZHANG Xiao-Yu, ZHANG Xi-Ying. Optimization of root sampling sites and modeling root length density distribution for wheat and maize [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2013, 37(4): 365-372.
[8]	JIAO Nian-Yuan,YANG Meng-Ke,NING Tang-Yuan,YIN Fei,XU Guo-Wei,FU Guo-Zhan,LI You-Jun. Effects of maize-peanut intercropping and phosphate fertilizer on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of intercropped peanut plants [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2013, 37(11): 1010-1017.
[9]	SUN Dong-Bao, WANG Qing-Suo. Effects of water on the photosynthetic characteristics of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2012, 36(1): 72-80.
[10]	AN Zhuo, NIU De-Cao, WEN Hai-Yan, YANG Yi, ZHANG Hong-Rong, FU Hua. Effects of N addition on nutrient resorption efficiency and C:N:P stoichiometric characteristics in Stipa bungeana of steppe grasslands in the Loess Plateau, China [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2011, 35(8): 801-807.
[11]	FENG Yuan-Jiao, WANG Jian-Wu, LUO Shi-Ming. TIMING AND CONCENTRATION EFFECTS ON THE DEFENSE RESPONSE OF ZEA MAYS SEEDLINGS AFTER APPLICATION OF JASMONIC ACID TO LEAVES [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2009, 33(4): 812-823.
[12]	HUANG Juan, WU Tong, KONG Guo-Hui, CHEN Zhi-Dong, ZHANG Jin-Zhong. SEASONAL CHANGES OF PHOTOSYNTHETIC CHARACTERISTICS IN 12 TREE SPECIES INTRODUCED ONTO OIL SHALE WASTE [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2006, 30(4): 666-674.
[13]	DAI Quan-Lin, YUAN Jian-Gang, FANG Wei, YANG Zhong-Yi. DIFFERENCES OF Pb ACCUMULATION AMONG PLANT TISSUES OF 25 ZEA MAYS VARIETIES [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2005, 29(6): 992-999.
[14]	JIANG Li-Geng, DAI Ting-Bo, WEI Shan-Qing, GAN Xiu-Qin, XU Jian-Yun, CAO Wei-Xing. Genotypic Differences and Valuation in Nitrogen Uptake and Utilization Efficiency in Rice [J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2003, 27(4): 466-471.
[15]	ZHANG Na, YU Gui-Rui, ZHAO YU Zhen-Liang, Shi-Dong. Simulation of Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Natural Vegetation Light Utilization Efficiency Based on 3s [J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2003, 27(3): 325-336.