Next Article in Journal
Interactive Effect of Cultivars, Crop Years and Rootstocks on the Biochemical Traits of Prunus persica (L.) Batsch Fruits
Next Article in Special Issue
Integrative Physiological, Transcriptome, and Proteome Analyses Provide Insights into the Photosynthetic Changes in Maize in a Maize–Peanut Intercropping System
Previous Article in Journal
Characterization and Coexpression Analysis of the TIFY Family Genes in Euryale ferox Related to Leaf Development
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cereal–Pea Intercropping Reveals Variability in the Relationships among Yield, Quality Parameters, and Obligate Pathogens Infection in Wheat, Rye, Oat, and Triticale, in a Temperate Environment
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 12
Issue 12
10.3390/plants12122324
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Photosynthetic Acclimation of Shade-Grown Soybean Seedlings to a High-Light Environment

by
Yahan Su
1,2,†,
Huan Yang
1,2,†,
Yushan Wu
1,2,*,
Wanzhuo Gong
3,
Hina Gul
4,
Yanhong Yan
5 and
Wenyu Yang
1,2
1
College of Agronomy, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
2
Key Laboratory of Crop Eco-Physiology and Farming System in Southwest of China, Sichuan Engineering Research Center for Crop Strip Intercropping System, Chengdu 611130, China
3
Crop Research Institute, Chengdu Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Chengdu 611130, China
4
National Center of Industrial Biotechnology, Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi 46300, Pakistan
5
College of Grassland Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Plants 2023, 12(12), 2324; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122324
Submission received: 22 May 2023 / Revised: 8 June 2023 / Accepted: 13 June 2023 / Published: 15 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Intercropping)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Soybean in relay intercropping is initially exposed to a shade environment, followed by exposure to full sunlight after the harvesting of primary crops, e.g., maize. Therefore, soybean’s ability to acclimate to this changing light environment determines its growth and yield formation. However, the changes in soybean photosynthesis under such light alternations in relay intercropping are poorly understood. This study compared the photosynthetic acclimation of two soybean varieties with contrasting shade tolerance, i.e., Gongxuan1 (shade-tolerant) and C103 (shade-intolerant). The two soybean genotypes were grown in a greenhouse under full sunlight (HL) and 40% full sunlight (LL) conditions. Subsequently, after the fifth compound leaf expanded, half of the LL plants were transferred to a high-sunlight environment (LL-HL). Morphological traits were measured at 0 and 10 days, while chlorophyll content, gas exchange characteristics and chlorophyll fluorescence were assayed at 0, 2, 4, 7 and 10 days after transfer to an HL environment (LL-HL). Shade-intolerant C103 showed photoinhibition 10 days after transfer, and the net photosynthetic rate (Pn) did not completely recover to that under a high light level. On the day of transfer, the shade-intolerant variety, C103, exhibited a decrease in net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (Gs) and transpiration rate (E) in the low-light (LL) and low-light-to-high-light (LL-HL) treatments. Additionally, intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) increased in low light, suggesting that non-stomatal factors were the primary limitations to photosynthesis in C103 following the transfer. In contrast, the shade-tolerant variety, Gongxuan1, displayed a greater increase in Pn 7 days after transfer, with no difference observed between the HL and LL-HL treatments. Ten days after transfer, the shade-tolerant Gongxuan1 exhibited 24.1%, 10.9% and 20.9% higher biomass, leaf area and stem diameter than the intolerant C103. These findings suggest that Gongxuan1 possesses a higher capacity to adapt to variations in light conditions, making it a potential candidate for variety selection in intercropping systems.

1. Introduction

Food security is a big challenge across the world owing to the changing global climate, increasing population and decreasing cultivable land [1,2]. Under these circumstances, intercropping has been employed as a sustainable agricultural practice in many areas of the world. It exhibits temporal complementarity and high resource use efficiency by utilizing light, water and nutrition [3,4]. Soybean (Glycine max Merr.), the fourth most widely cultivated crop worldwide, is a key component of global food security, and is the main source of plant protein and oil [5]. In order to increase the area under cultivation and yield of soybean, it is also planted in various intercropping combinations with maize, sorghum, sunflower and fruit trees [6,7,8,9]. However, soybean is often exposed to shade conditions under these intercropping systems.
The maize–soybean relay strip intercropping system is a widely practiced system worldwide [8,10,11]. In this system, maize is usually sown at the beginning of April, while soybean is planted in the middle of June; the late-planted soybean experiences varying growth environments, i.e., the shade period when maize and soybean grow simultaneously, and the natural sunlight period after the harvesting of maize [12,13]. In the shade period, the maize canopy can reduce the availability of PAR and alter the light quality for soybean seedlings. Soybean changes its morphological and physiological traits, for example, through elongation of its stem, petiole and hypocotyl, and by reducing its branching and stem diameter, to acclimatize under shade conditions and improve light capture [9,14]. The decreased leaf area under shade conditions leads to reduced biomass, as plants invest the biomass in stem elongation rather than the leaf [10,15]. Additionally, some soybean genotypes also show shade tolerance traits, such as increased specific leaf area (SLA) and chlorophyll (Chl) content and a reduction in Pn and the Chl a/b ratio [14].
However, knowledge about the photosynthetic response of soybean under different light conditions imposed by varying growth conditions under intercropping is still limited. Soybean is grown under full sunlight during the solo-growth period of soybean in the maize–soybean relay strip intercropping system after maize harvest. This period lasts around two months and cannot be neglected as it is the main period of yield formation [12,13]. During this period, studies have reported the compensatory growth of soybean, under which the leaf area and leaf mass increase rapidly, and soybean grows into the reproductive stages [13]. Similarly, the significant increase in dry matter accumulation during the recovery growth period is also an important factor contributing to the yield advantage of maize–soybean relay strip intercropping [16]. Notably, most previous studies have focused on soybean yield formation or yield components in relay intercropping at final harvest, while the underlying physiological mechanisms of soybean recovery from shade to full sunlight are yet to be elucidated. Moreover, genetic variation needs to be investigated to study soybean acclimation. It is necessary to compare the responses among different soybean varieties when transferred from low light to high light. Therefore, the current study was conducted with the objectives of: (1) testing whether soybean seedlings grown in low light can acclimate to high light, and (2) comparing the differences in photosynthetic characteristics between soybean varieties with different shade tolerance when transferred from shade after acclimatizing to high-light conditions.

2. Methods

2.1. Experimental Design

The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse at the Teaching and Experimental Farm of Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya’ an (29°59′ N, 103°00′ E). Two soybean varieties, shade-tolerant Gongxuan1 [13] and shade-intolerant C103 [17], were selected in this study under three light treatments, with at least three replicates in each treatment. Plants were sown in polythene pots (20 cm diameter × 40 cm depth) and watered to maintain the soil at field capacity. The soil was a purple clay loam (pH 6.6), with 1.21 g kg−1 N, 0.61 g kg−1 P, 11.44 g kg−1 K, 62.35 mg kg−1 available N, 24.34 mg kg−1 available P, 65.72 mg kg−1 available K and 8.96 g kg−1 organic matter. The three light treatments were high light (HL), low light (LL), and low light-to-high light transfer (low light for 50 days, and then, high light for 10 days (LL-HL)) (Figure 1). Each treatment contained 20 pots per variety, and the study lasted 60 days. In HL treatments, soybean plants were allowed to grow under natural sunlight conditions; in LL treatment, soybean plants were grown under 40% full sunlight (photosynthetically active radiation was 500 μ mol m−2 s−1, measured using an LM8130 Digital Meter Illuminometer) using shading nets (Q-MAX, USA, R:FR (0.5–0.6)) above and around pots throughout the experiment. In the transfer treatment, soybean was grown under LL for 50 days, and then, 10 pots were transferred to HL to simulate light recovery after the harvest of maize in the maize–soybean relay strip intercropping system. One day before the transfer, the latest fully expanded leaf (the third compound leaf from the top) from three treatments was tagged for measurements. Different parameters were measured 0, 2, 4, 7 and 10 days after the transfer, as described below in detail.

2.2. Gas Exchange Characteristics

Before the destructive sampling, the latest fully expanded leaves were examined using an infrared gas analysis instrument (LI-6400, Li-COR Inc., Lincoln, NE, USA) from 10:00 to 14:00 h to record net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (Gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) and transpiration rate (E). At least six seedlings of each soybean variety were measured under each treatment.

2.3. Chlorophyll Fluorescence

After measuring gas exchange characteristics, chlorophyll fluorescence was analyzed using a PAM-2000 pulse-amplitude-modulated fluorometer (Heinz Walz GmbH, Effeltrich, Germany) following a 30 min dark adaptation period. The maximum quantum yield of PSII (Fv/Fm), photochemical efficiency of PSII (ΦPSII), electron transport rate (ETR) and non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) were determined. Photon capture efficiency was determined through open Photosystem II (PSII) reaction centers in dark-adapted foliage.

2.4. Chlorophyll Content

Fresh leaves of the latest fully expanded leaves were sampled and quickly brought to the laboratory; six leaf discs were punched and extracted in 80% aqueous acetone solvent to determine total Chl and Chl a/b via spectrophotometric analysis [18].

2.5. Growth Characteristics

Six plants per pot were sampled 0 and 10 days after transfer to HL to measure biomass, plant height, and stem diameter. The latest fully expanded leaves were scanned using a flatbed scanner (CanoScan LiDE 200, Canon Inc., Tokyo, Japan) and the area was measured using ImageJ 1.45 s. After the sampling, plants were divided into roots, leaves, petioles and stems. Total biomass was calculated after the roots, leaves, petioles and stems were oven-dried to a constant mass. SLA was calculated by dividing the measured area by its dry mass (DM), total leaf area (LA) was calculated by multiplying SLA by total leaf DM, and leaf area ratio (LAR) was calculated by dividing LA by total aboveground biomass.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

All data analysis was performed via analysis of variance (ANOVA) using IBM SPSS 19.0 for Windows (SPSS, Armonk, NY, USA: IBM Corp). Significant differences were defined as p ≤ 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Leaf Chlorophyll Content

Compared to HL, the total chlorophyll content (Chl (a+b)) and Chl b in LL were significantly higher, while the Chl a/b ratio was significantly lower throughout the experiment (Figure 2). Two days after the transfer to HL(LL-HL), the Chl (a+b) and Chl b of the two varieties decreased sharply. However, the Chl a/b ratio of the two varieties showed no significant difference between LL-HL and HL on the 10th day after transfer.

3.2. Gas Exchange Characteristics

As shown in Figure 3, two days after being transferred to high-light (HL) conditions, the photosynthetic rate (Pn) of C103 seedlings growing under low-light LL-HL conditions was significantly lower (50.1%) compared to those in HL. Similar reductions were also observed in stomatal conductance (Gs) (69.5%) and transpiration rate (E) (30%) (Figure 3C,G). Gongxuan1 seedlings exhibited a similar trend, with a decrease of 23.5% in Pn and 43.8% in E under LL-HL conditions. As the recovery time increased, the Pn and Gs of C103 seedlings showed some recovery, but did not reach the control level (HL). However, there was no significant difference in the Pn and intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) in Gongxuan1 between the LL-HL and HL conditions on the seventh day after transfer.

3.3. Chlorophyll Fluorescence

The Fv/Fm varied significantly under three light treatments between the two genotypes. The shade-intolerant genotype, C103, showed significantly lower Fv/Fm values under LL than HL, but the shade-tolerant Gongxuan1 showed higher Fv/Fm values under LL than HL. Two days after the transfer of the shade-adapted (LL) plant to HL conditions (LL-HL), both genotypes showed a decline in Fv/Fm values (Figure 4A,B). Compared to HL, C103 expressed lower Fv/Fm values in LL-HL, whereas no difference was observed between HH and LL-HL in Gongxuan1 after the 4 days of HL exposure. However, after 10 days of HL exposure, Gongxuan1 showed higher Fv/Fm values than HL.
Both varieties showed higher PSII values under LL than HL and LL-HL on all studied days. Two days after the transfer, there was no significant difference between the PSII values under HL and LL-HL conditions. However, in the following days under LL-HL conditions, the PSII values of the two genotypes were lowest in both genotypes, showing an increased number of closed reaction centers.
We found that both varieties showed significantly higher ETR in HL than in LL throughout the experiment. After two days under LL-HL, there was a sudden increase in ETR in LL-HL compared to LL. Two varieties showed steady recovery in the following days, but neither could completely recover their HL levels. The transfer of shade-adapted LL plants to HL induced significant NPQ in both genotypes. However, the NPQ values of the shade-tolerant Gongxuan 1 were significantly higher than those of the shade-intolerant C103.

3.4. Growth Characteristics

As shown in Table 1, soybean plants exposed to LL conditions showed reduced total biomass and stem diameter and an elongated stem. However, the exposure to increased light intensity under LL-HL conditions caused a steady increase in biomass, stem girth and plant height, demonstrating the recovery growth of both genotypes. Compared to C103 under LL (at 0 days) and LL-HL (at 10 days), Gongxuan 1 always showed shorter plant height and higher biomass and stem diameter, indicating its higher tolerance to shade stress.

3.5. Leaf Morphological Traits

The plants of both genotypes under LL conditions showed significantly higher SLA and LAR and lower LA in LL compared to HL (Table 2). After 10 days of transference, the SLA and LAR of LL-HL were still much higher than in HL, but there was no significant difference in the LAs of the plants between HL and LL-HL. Gongxuan 1 showed higher LA than C103 in LL at 0 days and in LL-LH at 10 days after exposure to high light.

4. Discussion

4.1. Physiological Acclimation

Plants adapt to shade through either shade tolerance [14] or shade avoidance mechanisms [19,20]. Shade tolerance mechanisms, which can help plants survive under low-light conditions, and to increase light harvesting or light use efficiency. These mechanisms include increasing chlorophyll (Chl) content, increasing specific leaf area and reducing the Chl a/b ratio [21]. For instance, shaded leaves show higher Chl content per leaf mass and a lower Chl a/b ratio owing to the bigger chloroplast size and lower number of chloroplasts per unit area [22,23]. Similarly, our results showed that both soybean varieties showed shade tolerance features by adjusting the Chl content and chlorophyll a/b ratio after transferring to HL. However, Gongxuan1 showed more rapid recovery than C103 as it is more effective in translocating the nitrogen from light-harvesting components (such as chlorophyll and carotenoids) to carboxylation components (such as RuBP carboxylation and regeneration enzymes) under changing light conditions. These results reflect that soybean can adjust plant chlorophyll content dynamically to adapt to different light conditions.
Light intensity is one of the most important factors affecting the photosynthetic efficiency of plants. Below the light saturation point, any decrease in light intensity decreases leaf Pn [24], while exposure to higher light intensity may also decrease Pn through photoinhibition. Consistent with the previous studies, the shade conditions in the present study reduced the photosynthesis rate and stomatal conductance of both the genotypes (Figure 2A–D), albeit more obviously in C103 [10,25]. In maize–soybean relay strip intercropping, shade-grown soybean seedlings can be exposed to full sunlight after maize harvest, which may induce photoinhibition and cause a decrease in Pn, particularly in the genotypes with less acclimation capacity [26,27]. Similarly, we also observed a post-transfer decrease in Pn in both soybean varieties, possibly due to photoinhibition induced by the sudden exposure to increased light intensity. The shade-intolerant variety, C103, showed a greater decline in Pn than the shade-tolerant Gongxuan1, which indicates its sensitivity to changing light conditions. Gongxuan1, selected from the local natural population in the 1990s, expressed lower Pn than C103 under high light and light transfer, but it recovered to the control level, which is consistent with its lower levels of photoinhibition. In contrast, in recent years, the development of C103, as an artificial breeding variety, has focused more on improving its photosynthetic capacity than on acclimation to light transfer. Previous research suggested that increased Pn under high light acclimation could be due to the accumulation of photosynthetic enzymes in mature leaves [28] or the rearrangement of chloroplasts in palisade cells to cover a larger cell membrane area [29]. Therefore, the increased Pn after the transfer of shade-adapted soybean plants to higher light intensity might be linked to the increased activity of ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase in the chloroplasts, the number and volume of chloroplasts or their combined impact. Since photosynthesis is crucial for yield formation, the soybean genotypes with the ability to overcome photoinhibition and acclimatize to light conditions after maize harvest show higher recovery growth by gradually increasing their Pn under the increased light intensity.
Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters can explain the adaptability of plants to light intensity changes from the angle of internal changes caused by photosynthesis [30]. Some studies have found that the sudden exposure of shade-grown seedlings to full sunlight resulted in an immediate and substantial reduction in Fv/Fm and PSII, followed by a gradual recovery [31,32,33]. In this study, we also noticed a decline in Fv/Fm and PSII after 2 days of exposure to high light intensity. This illustrated that the photochemical efficiency of the shade-adapted soybean was inhibited when it was exposed to natural light. This decrease in Fv/Fm in C103 was larger than that in Gongxuan1, indicating that C103 suffered more severe photoinhibition. Moreover, the higher Fv/Fm of Gongxuan1 under low light compared to high light is consistent with its better adaptability to shade [13].
NPQ is an important pathway to the dissipation of energy [34]. Combined with previous studies, we found that shade reduces the NPQ of the two soybean varieties, which shows that energy dissipation is relatively low in soybeans under shade [35]. The increase in NPQ in the two soybean varieties after transference (Figure 4) indicated that energy dissipation is important for the recovery of Fv/Fm, especially for the shade-tolerant Gongxuan1, which showed higher NPQ in LL-HL than C103, indicating that Gongxuan1 may have greater capability for energy dissipation after transfer. This article mainly analyses the photosynthetic electron transport chain to explain the cause of the differences in photosynthetic capacity between two soybean varieties after light transfer, not involving yield and its components; the influence on yield under different light conditions still needs further research.

4.2. Morphological Acclimation

The shade avoidance mechanism mainly shows morphological plasticity, and refers to the ability of plants to alter their morphology in response to light changes in their environment [36]; it can help plants escape from shade and likely increase light capture, inducing responses such as enhanced stem and petiole elongation, higher dry mass allocation to the stem than to the leaf and root, and the development of small leaf angles [19,20].
Consistent with the previous studies, stem elongation and reduced stem diameter were observed in soybean plants to enable them to reach for the light under shade. Moreover, our results showed that shade caused a reduction in plant biomass and leaf area and increased SLA and LAR (Table 1) [8,14,37]. The leaf area is also an important factor affecting plant light interception and biomass [38]. Compared to the intolerant variety, C103, the shade-tolerant Gongxuan1 showed larger LA in the shade, indicating that Gongxuan1 can intercept more light, enabling it to adapt to shade conditions. This is consistent with its shorter height under shade conditions. Taken together, these results show that better light interception mediated by higher leaf area in Gongxuan1 helped it avert shade avoidance syndrome and accumulate more biomass than shade-susceptible C103. After light transfer, the two soybean genotypes showed recovery growth, especially for biomass and leaf area accumulation (Table 1). Studies have found biomass partition to the leaf and leaf area after recovery from reduced light conditions in intercropping systems [13,39,40]. Similarly, the recovery growth observed in the present study was mainly due to the rapid increment in leaf area and the maintenance of carbon gain balance. Although the increase in plant height under LL-HL was slower than in LL (Table 1), plant height and stem diameter still expressed irreversible differences between LL and HL, even after transfer. Altogether, the larger biomass and leaf area in Gongxuan1 than in C103 indicate that it has a strong recovery capacity and is more suitable for intercropping. The results of this study confirm the difference in the adaptability of the photosynthetic characteristics of two soybean varieties with contrasting shade tolerance when transferred from low light to high light, and provide a reference for improving the yield of intercropped soybean by screening or breeding more suitable varieties.

5. Conclusions

This study observed the genetic variation within soybean in acclimation to light transfer. The results showed that the photosynthetic capacity (Pn, Fv/Fm and PSII) of Gongxuan1 can recover to the control level after transfer to increased light intensity conditions. Moreover, Gongxuan1 showed 46.1% higher NPQ, 24.1% more biomass and 10.9% more leaf area than C103. Therefore, it can be concluded that the acclimation capacity of the shade-intolerant variety, C103, is lower than that of the shade-tolerant variety Gongxuan1. Thus, Gongxuan1 appears to be more suitable for the changing light environment of relay intercropping. This provides a new target for soybean screening or breeding for intercropping in the future.

Author Contributions

Y.W., W.G. and W.Y. designed the experiments. Y.W. performed the experiments and data collection and wrote the manuscript. Y.S. and H.Y. performed the data analysis and wrote the manuscript. H.G. and Y.Y. commented on and revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 32001416) and The National Key Research and Development Program of China (no. 2022YFD2300901).

Data Availability Statement

The data that support this study may be shared upon reasonable request to the corresponding author, if appropriate.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Godfray, H.C.J.; Beddington, J.R.; Crute, I.R.; Haddad, L.; Lawrence, D.; Muir, J.F.; Pretty, J.; Robinson, S.; Thomas, S.M.; Toulmin, C. Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 2010, 327, 812–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Seleiman, M.F.; Selim, S.; Alhammad, B.A.; Alharbi, B.M.; Juliatti, F.C. Will novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic impact agriculture, food security and animal sectors? Biosci. J. 2020, 36, 1315–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lithourgidis, A.; Dordas, C.; Damalas, C.; Vlachostergios, D. Annual intercrops: An alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2011, 5, 396–410. [Google Scholar]
  4. Malezieux, E.; Crozat, Y.; Dupraz, C.; Laurans, M.; Makowski, D.; Ozier-Lafontaine, H.; Rapidel, B.; De Tourdonnet, S.; Valantin-Morison, M. Mixing plant species in cropping systems: Concepts, tools and models. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 29, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Ainsworth, E.A.; Yendrek, C.R.; Skoneczka, J.A.; Long, S.P. Accelerating yield potential in soybean: Potential targets for biotechnological improvement. Plant Cell Environ. 2012, 35, 38–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Echarte, L.; Della Maggiora, A.; Cerrudo, D.; Gonzalez, V.H.; Abbate, P.; Cerrudo, A.; Sadras, V.O.; Calviño, P. Yield response to plant density of maize and sunflower intercropped with soybean. Field Crops Res. 2011, 121, 423–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ghosh, P.; Tripathi, A.; Bandyopadhyay, K.; Manna, M. Assessment of nutrient competition and nutrient requirement in soybean/sorghum intercropping system. Eur. J. Agron. 2009, 31, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yang, F.; Huang, S.; Gao, R.C.; Liu, W.G.; Yong, T.W.; Wang, X.C.; Wu, X.L.; Yang, W.Y. Growth of soybean seedlings in relay strip intercropping systems in relation to light quantity and red:far-red ratio. Field Crops Res. 2014, 155, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yang, F.; Wang, X.C.; Liao, D.P.; Lu, F.Z.; Gao, R.C.; Liu, W.G.; Yong, T.W.; Wu, X.L.; Du, J.B.; Liu, J.; et al. Yield Response to Different Planting Geometries in Maize–Soybean Relay Strip Intercropping Systems. Agron. J. 2015, 107, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Su, B.Y.; Song, Y.X.; Song, C.; Cui, L.; Yong, T.W.; Yang, W.Y. Growth and photosynthetic responses of soybean seedlings to maize shading in relay inter-cropping system in Southwest China. Photosynthetica 2014, 52, 332–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yan, Y.H.; Gong, W.Z.; Yang, W.Y.; Wan, Y.; Chen, X.L.; Chen, Z.Q.; Wang, L.Y. Seed Treatment with Uniconazole Powder Improves Soybean Seedling Growth under Shading by Corn in Relay Strip Intercropping System. Plant Prod. Sci. 2010, 13, 367–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wu, Y.S.; Gong, W.Z.; Yang, F.; Wang, X.C.; Yong, T.W.; Liu, J.; Pu, T.; Yan, Y.H.; Yang, W.Y. Dynamic of recovery growth of intercropped soybean after maize harvest in maize–soybean relay strip intercropping system. Food Energy Secur. 2021, 11, e350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wu, Y.S.; Gong, W.Z.; Yang, F.; Wang, X.C.; Yong, T.W.; Yang, W.Y. Responses to shade and subsequent recovery of soya bean in maize-soya bean relay strip intercropping. Plant Prod. Sci. 2016, 19, 206–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Gong, W.Z.; Jiang, C.D.; Wu, Y.S.; Chen, H.H.; Liu, W.Y.; Yang, W.Y. Tolerance vs. avoidance: Two strategies of soybean (Glycine max) seedlings in response to shade in intercropping. Photosynthetica 2015, 53, 259–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wu, Y.-S.; Yang, F.; Gong, W.-Z.; Ahmed, S.; Fan, Y.-F.; Wu, X.-L.; Yong, T.-W.; Liu, W.-G.; Shu, K.; Liu, J.; et al. Shade adaptive response and yield analysis of different soybean genotypes in relay intercropping systems. J. Integr. Agric. 2017, 16, 1331–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Li, L.; Sun, J.H.; Zhang, F.S.; Li, X.L.; Rengel, Z.; Yang, S.C. Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping: II. Recovery or compensation of maize and soybean after wheat harvesting. Field Crops Res. 2001, 71, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wu, Y.S.; Gong, W.Z.; Liu, X.; Wang, X.C.; Yang, W.Y. Physiological evaluation index of recovery ability of soybean seedling after removing shade stress. Chin. J. Oil Crop Sci. 2016, 38, 804–810. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lichtenthaler, H.K. Chlorophyls and carotenoids: Pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. Methods Enzymol. 1987, 148, 350–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Franklin, K.A. Shade avoidance. New Phytol. 2008, 179, 930–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Franklin, K.A.; Whitelam, G.C. Phytochromes and Shade-avoidance Responses in Plants. Ann. Bot. 2005, 96, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Valladares, F.; Niinemets, U. Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2008, 39, 237–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Bjorkman, O.; Holmgren, P. Photosynthetic Adaptation to Light Intensity in Plants Native to Shaded and Exposed Habitats. Physiol. Plant. 1966, 19, 854–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zheng, Y.; Mai, B.; Wu, R.; Feng, Y.; Sofo, A.; Ni, Y.; Sun, J.; Li, J.; Xu, J. Acclimation of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum, cv. Yangmai 13) to low levels of solar irradiance. Photosynthetica 2011, 49, 426–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Jiang, Y.; Wu, C.X.; Zhang, L.X.; Hu, P.; Hou, W.Z.; Zu, W.; Han, T.F. Long-day effects on the terminal inflorescence development of a photoperiod-sensitive soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] variety. Plant Sci. 2011, 180, 504–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Araujo, W.L.; Dias, P.C.; Moraes, G.A.B.K.; Celin, E.F.; Cunha, R.L.; Barros, R.S.; DaMatta, F.M. Limitations to photosynthesis in coffee leaves from different canopy positions. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2008, 46, 884–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Liu, X.; Herbert, S.J.; Hashemi, A.M.; Litchfield, G.V.; Zhang, Q. Yield and yield components responses of old and new soybean cultivars to source-sink manipulation under light enrichment. Plant Soil Environ. 2006, 52, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Mathew, J.P.; Herbert, S.J.; Zhang, S.; Rautenkranz, A.A.; Litchfield, G.V. Differential response of soybean yield components to the timing of light enrichment. Agron. J. 2000, 92, 1156–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Avalos, G.; Mulkey, S.S. Photosynthetic acclimation of the liana Stigmaphyllon lindenianum to light changes in a tropical dry forest canopy. Oecologia 1999, 120, 475–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Oguchi, R.; Hikosaka, K.; Hirose, T. Does the photosynthetic light-acclimation need change in leaf anatomy? Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26, 505–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Krause, G.; Weis, E. Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis: The basics. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1991, 42, 313–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Houter, N.C.; Pons, T.L. Gap size effects on photoinhibition in understorey saplings in tropical rainforest. Plant Ecol. 2005, 179, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Naramoto, M.; Katahata, S.-I.; Mukai, Y.; Kakubari, Y. Photosynthetic acclimation and photoinhibition on exposure to high light in shade-developed leaves of Fagus crenata seedlings. Flora 2006, 201, 120–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shimizu, M.; Ishida, A.; Tange, T.; Yagi, H. Leaf turnover and growth responses of shade-grown saplings of four Shorea rain forest species to a sudden increase in light. Tree Physiol. 2006, 26, 449–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Demmig-Adams, B.; Adams Iii, W. Photoprotection and other responses of plants to high light stress. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 1992, 43, 599–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhou, L.-J.; Xie, Y.-Q.; Xu, W.; Guo, Q.-H.; Dai, S.; Zhao, S.-J.; Song, J.-M. Effects of full sunlight after shading on photosynthetic characteristics of xiaoyan 54 and 8602, and their hybrids. Acta Agron. Sin. 2015, 41, 813–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. González, A.V.; Gianoli, E. Morphological plasticity in response to shading in three Convolvulus species of different ecological breadth. Acta Oecologica 2004, 26, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liu, W.G.; Zou, J.L.; Zhang, J.; Yang, F.; Wan, Y.; Yang, W.Y. Evaluation of Soybean (Glycine max) Stem Vining in Maize-Soybean Relay Strip Intercropping System. Plant Prod. Sci. 2015, 18, 69–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Yao, H.; Zhang, Y.; Yi, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, W. Cotton responds to different plant population densities by adjusting specific leaf area to optimize canopy photosynthetic use efficiency of light and nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 2016, 188, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gong, W.Z.; Wu, Y.S.; Yong, T.W.; Liu, W.G.; Yang, W.Y. Effects of shade and lighting recovery on growth and yield of soybean in maize-soybean relay strip intercropping. Chin. J. Oil Crops Sci. 2015, 37, 475–480. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wu, Y.-S.; Gong, W.-Z.; Liao, D.-P.; Wu, X.-L.; Yang, F.; Liu, W.-G.; Yong, T.-W.; Yang, W.-Y. Effects of shade and light recovery on soybean cultivars(Lines) and its relationship with yield in relay strip intercropping system. Acta Agron. Sin. 2015, 41, 1740–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 12 02324 g001 550
Figure 1. Experimental design of this study. (A) plant grown in high light (HL), (B) plant grown in low light (LL), (C) plant transferred from low light to high light (LL−HL). The grey background in (B,C) represents the shading nets.
Figure 1. Experimental design of this study. (A) plant grown in high light (HL), (B) plant grown in low light (LL), (C) plant transferred from low light to high light (LL−HL). The grey background in (B,C) represents the shading nets.
Plants 12 02324 g001
Plants 12 02324 g002 550
Figure 2. (A,B) Chl b, (C,D) total chlorophyll (Chl) (a+b), (E,F) Chl a/b of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL)and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Figure 2. (A,B) Chl b, (C,D) total chlorophyll (Chl) (a+b), (E,F) Chl a/b of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL)and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Plants 12 02324 g002
Plants 12 02324 g003 550
Figure 3. (A,B) Net photosynthetic rate (Pn), (C,D) stomatal conductance (Gs), (E,F) intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci), (G,H) transpiration rate (E) of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Figure 3. (A,B) Net photosynthetic rate (Pn), (C,D) stomatal conductance (Gs), (E,F) intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci), (G,H) transpiration rate (E) of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Plants 12 02324 g003
Plants 12 02324 g004 550
Figure 4. (A,B) Maximum quantum yield of PSII (Fv/Fm), (C,D) photochemical efficiency of PSII (ΦPSII), (E,F) electron transport rate (ETR), (G,H) non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Figure 4. (A,B) Maximum quantum yield of PSII (Fv/Fm), (C,D) photochemical efficiency of PSII (ΦPSII), (E,F) electron transport rate (ETR), (G,H) non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) of C103 and Gongxuan 1 under low light (LL) and high light (HL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL−HL). Error bars show SD, n = 6.
Plants 12 02324 g004
Table
Table 1. Biomass, plant height and stem diameter of soybean grown under high light (HL) and low light (LL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL-HL).
Table 1. Biomass, plant height and stem diameter of soybean grown under high light (HL) and low light (LL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL-HL).
BiomassPlant HeightStem Diameter
TimeVarietyTreatment(g plant–1)(cm)(mm)
0 day
Gongxuan1HL10.4 ± 0.6 a35.0 ± 2.7 c6.9 ± 0.4 a
LL4.7 ± 0.8 b57.5 ± 4.9 b3.5 ± 0.1 c
C103HL9.8 ± 0.5 a52.5 ± 4.0 b5.5 ± 0.2 b
LL3.2 ± 0.4 c96.5 ± 4.4 a2.9 ± 0.2 d
ANOVA (F-value)
Treatment (T) 56.93 **12.31 **16.42 **
Variety (V) 0.140.15 *0.05
T × V 0.13 **0.04 **0.03 *
10 days
Gongxuan1HL13.7 ± 1.0 a45.0 ± 4.8 d7.1 ± 0.5 a
LL7.2 ± 0.6 e78.0 ± 6.8 b4.8 ± 0.4 c
LL-HL11.3 ± 0.4 c69.0 ± 4.6 c5.2 ± 0.5 b
C103HL13.0 ± 1.1 b65.0 ± 6.4 c6.2 ± 0.2 a
LL6.8 ± 0.3 e105.0 ± 5.6 a4.0 ± 0.3 d
LL-HL9.1 ± 1.1 d102.3 ± 4.9 b4.3 ± 0.1 c
ANOVA (F-value)
Treatment (T) 43.12 **10.42 **12.32 *
Variety (V) 1.85 *1.95 **0.61 *
T × V 1.68 *0.56 *0.40
* and **: significant at p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.01, respectively. Data represent mean ± SD of three replicate plots (n = 6). Values followed by different letters in the same column are significantly different at the 0.05 probability level in ANOVA.
Table
Table 2. Leaf area ratio (LAR), specific leaf area (SLA) and total leaf area (LA) of soybean plants grown under high light (HL) and low light (LL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL-HL).
Table 2. Leaf area ratio (LAR), specific leaf area (SLA) and total leaf area (LA) of soybean plants grown under high light (HL) and low light (LL) and following transfer from low light to high light (LL-HL).
LARSLALA
TimeVarietyTreatment(cm2 g–1)(m2 kg–1)per Plant (cm2)
0 day
Gongxuan1HL157.5 ± 4.2 b26.6 ± 2.0 b1615.8 ± 108.2 a
LL202.8 ± 6.5 a34.0 ± 1.0 a861.3 ± 197.9 b
C103HL149.2 ± 5.3 b27.2 ± 0.6 b1470.1 ± 167.0 a
LL184.1 ± 3.0 a41.0 ± 2.6 a571.6 ± 185.0 b
ANOVA (F-value)
Treatment (T)32.42 *2.41 *4.93 *
Variety (V) 1.700.733.39
T × V 1.470.321.23
10 days
Gongxuan1HL135.2 ± 3.1 c22.7 ± 0.6 c1705.0 ± 123.9 a
LL198.3 ± 6.0 a35.0 ± 0.8 a1544.4 ± 127.7 b
LL-HL148.8 ± 8.9 b30.5 ± 1.6 b1664.8 ± 111.2 a
C103HL126.0 ± 1.8 c20.8 ± 0.6 c1632.5 ± 114.9 a
LL203.5 ± 5.6 a35.5 ± 1.5 a1386.4 ± 91.1 c
LL-HL163.2 ± 9.5 b32.9 ± 1.0 b1502.0 ± 100.6 b
ANOVA (F-value)
Treatment (T)32.42 **1.10 **4.93 *
Variety (V) 0.130.040.18
T × V 0.110.020.06
* and **: significant at p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.01, respectively. Data represent mean ± SD of three replicate plots (n = 6). Values followed by different letters in the same column are significantly different at the 0.05 probability level in ANOVA.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Su, Y.; Yang, H.; Wu, Y.; Gong, W.; Gul, H.; Yan, Y.; Yang, W. Photosynthetic Acclimation of Shade-Grown Soybean Seedlings to a High-Light Environment. Plants 2023, 12, 2324. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122324

AMA Style

Su Y, Yang H, Wu Y, Gong W, Gul H, Yan Y, Yang W. Photosynthetic Acclimation of Shade-Grown Soybean Seedlings to a High-Light Environment. Plants. 2023; 12(12):2324. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122324

Chicago/Turabian Style

Su, Yahan, Huan Yang, Yushan Wu, Wanzhuo Gong, Hina Gul, Yanhong Yan, and Wenyu Yang. 2023. "Photosynthetic Acclimation of Shade-Grown Soybean Seedlings to a High-Light Environment" Plants 12, no. 12: 2324. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122324

APA Style

Su, Y., Yang, H., Wu, Y., Gong, W., Gul, H., Yan, Y., & Yang, W. (2023). Photosynthetic Acclimation of Shade-Grown Soybean Seedlings to a High-Light Environment. Plants, 12(12), 2324. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122324

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop