| Literature DB >> 26306170 |
David J Weston1, Alistair Rogers2, Timothy J Tschaplinski1, Lee E Gunter1, Sara A Jawdy1, Nancy L Engle1, Lindsey E Heady2, Gerald A Tuskan1, Stan D Wullschleger3.
Abstract
Understanding the consequences of elevated CO2 (eEntities:
Keywords: Buffering; carbon; ecological genomics; networks; nitrogen; robustness; scaling
Year: 2015 PMID: 26306170 PMCID: PMC4541989 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1565
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Two complementary approaches were used to examine the concept of robustness in wild-type and nia2 mutants of Arabidopsis. Soil-based mesocosms (A) allowed sampling of plants (B) over multiple generations. Similarly, hydroponic mesocosms in growth chambers (C) facilitated measurements of plant biochemistry and photosynthesis (D) at current (400 ppm) and elevated CO2 (800 ppm) concentrations.
ANOVA results showing the effects of genotype, CO2, and their interactions on selected C and N metabolism intermediates. Presented are the F ratio and resulting P–value for the F-test in parentheses. All tests were performed within generation
| Generation 2 | Generation 4 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CO2 | Genotype (G) | CO2 × G | CO2 | Genotype (G) | CO2 × G | |
| Nitrogen metabolism | ||||||
| Nitrate reductase | 2.28 (0.165) | 42.71 (0.001) | 1.48 (0.253) | 1.05 (0.326) | 96.54 (0.001) | 7.73 (0.017) |
| Total amino acids | 2.48 (0.148) | 42.35 (0.001) | 0.03 (0.847) | 1.45 (0.253) | 113.50 (0.001) | 2.03 (0.181) |
| Total protein | 3.03 (0.102) | 44.54 (0.001) | 0 (1) | 0.01 (0.899) | 62.54 (0.001) | 0.01 (0.967) |
| Carbon metabolism | ||||||
| Sucrose | 2.20 (0.163) | 0.21 (0.649) | 4.71 (0.050) | 5.27 (0.040) | 0.03 (0.854) | 0.07 (0.790) |
| Glucose | 13.08 (0.010) | 2.35 (0.150) | 6.22 (0.028) | 3.68 (0.079) | 2.21 (0.162) | 0.01 (0.925) |
| Fructose | 11.01 (0.006) | 20.93 (0.001) | 1.12 (0.309) | 2.10 (0.172) | 12.82 (0.003) | 0.52 (0.485) |
| Starch | 21.39 (0.001) | 0.22 (0.647) | 0.11 (0.743) | 0.03 (0.851) | 0.04 (0.837) | 0.14 (0.712) |
Figure 2Relative difference between nia2 mutant and wild-type (Wt) mesocosm populations in response to CO2. Consequences of genotype and CO2 on measured nitrate reductase enzyme activity, total amino acid, and soluble protein concentrations (A) and on selected reducing sugars and starch (B). Bars represent the standard mean estimates and standard error of the mean (SE) between 2 generations for (A). In (B), standard mean estimates and SE are specific to one generation (generation 2) as differences between generations were significant. ANOVA results are presented in Table1.
Figure 3Relative difference in network module expression and seed production. Consequences of genotype and CO2 on the gene paralog to the mutant, nia1 (A) relationship between the expression of the N network module and seed production (B). Bars represent the standard mean estimates and standard error of the mean (SE) between 2 generations for (A). In (B), clear symbols represent wild type and solid symbols are mutant. Circles are ambient, while squares are elevated CO2. Both generations 2 and 4 are graphed in B.
ANOVA table for net photosynthesis and photosynthetic parameters. Presented are the effects of the genotype, CO2, and their interaction on mean parameter value, standard error in parentheses, and P-value for the resulting F-test
| Mean (standard error) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wt |
| Genotype (G) | CO2 | CO2 × G | |
| 72.7 (4.4) | 53.13 (4.4) | 0.036 | 0.420 | 0.754 | |
| 93.97 (3.12) | 77.74 (3.12) | 0.021 | 0.784 | 0.242 | |
| A400 ( | 9.54 (0.67) | 6.98 (0.67) | 0.056 | 0.607 | 0.806 |
| A800 ( | 16.41 (0.895) | 12.88 (0.895) | 0.049 | 0.802 | 0.440 |
Figure 4Population dynamics through generation. Clear symbols represent wild type and solid symbols are mutant. Circles are current 400 ppm [CO2], while squares are elevated CO2 at 400 ppm [CO2]. Both generations 2 and 4 are graphed in B.
Figure 5Relative difference among population productivity estimates. Relative consequences of genotype and CO2 on population-level biomass, ground cover, leaf area index (LAI), and leaf mass per area (LMA). Error bars denote the standard error of the mean.
Figure 6Consequences of genetic perturbation through levels of biological organization. Standardized effect size through molecular to organismal and population levels. Error bars denote the standard error of the mean effect size and the presence of asterisks denotes that the value is significantly different from 0 at P < 0.05.