Korean Journal of Environmental Biology (환경생물)

Korean Society of Environmental Biology (한국환경생물학회)
권호 표지

The Effects of Water Stress on C$_3$ Plant and CAM Plant

C$_3$ 식물과 CAM 식물에서 수분 스트레스의 효과

  • An, Du-Hwan (Department of Biology Education, College of Education, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Taek (Division of Science, Chungbuk Science High School) ;
  • Kim, Dae-Jae (Department of Biology Education, College of Education, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Lee, Joon-Sang (Department of Biology Education, College of Education, Chungbuk National University)
  • 안두환 (충북대학교 생물교육학과) ;
  • 김용택 (충북과학고등학교 과학부) ;
  • 김대재 (충북대학교 생물교육학과) ;
  • 이준상 (충북대학교 생물교육학과)
  • Published : 2008.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The differences of several kinds of physiological responses between Commelina communis (C$_3$ plant) and Sedum sarmentosum (CAM plant: Crassulacean Acid metabolism) when both plants were exposed to water stress for 3 weeks were investigated. In case of Commelina it was shown a clear loss of water to 12% in three weeks, but no changes were observed in Sedum. Total chlorophyll content was also reduced to 57% in Commelina but not clear changes of chlorophyll content in Sedum. were observed for three weeks. In chlorophyll fluorescence experiments Fv/Fm ratios were reduced to 19% in Commelina, but no changes were observed in Sedum. There were very sensitive responses according to the different KCl concentrations and the stomatal aperture of epidermal strips was 12.8 ${\mu}m$ at 200 mM KCl in Commelina, but less than 3 ${\mu}m$ was observed at the same KCl concentration in Sedum. In addition, there were no chloroplasts in guard cells of Sedum, but most plants had chloroplasts including Commelina. From the above results, the ability of water stress resistance in Sedum. could be come from slow physiological metabolism including growth and less loss of water through unique stomatal characteristics.

본 연구는 C$_3$식물인 닭의장풀과 CAM식물인 돌나물이 수분스트레스에 대해 어떠한 생리적인 반응의 차이를 보이는가를 살펴본 것이다. 식물은 정상적인 환경 조건하에서 보여주는 대표적인 특징은 생장이다. 닭의장풀은 수분스트레스에 처해졌을 때 생장이 거의 멈추었으나 돌나물은 생장에 커다란 영향을 받지 못하였다. 닭의장풀의 수분함유량의 변화는 3주 째 12% 감소하였다. 수분 함유량의 변화는 식물의 고사와 밀접하게 관련되어 있다. 돌나물의 수분함유량의 변화는 거의 없었다. 이는 돌나물은 수분스트레스에 대한 저항 반응을 보여주었으나 닭의장풀은 그렇지 못했다는 것을 의미한다. 이어진 실험에서도 비슷한 양상이 나타났다. 엽록소 함량의 변화, 광합성 II의 활성을 나타내는 형광 Fv/Fm 비율수치는 닭의장풀에서 심각한 감소가 일어났다. 아울러 기공의 형태적인 특성과 생리적인 반응도 두 종이 다른 양상을 보여주었다. 따라서 돌나물은 수분스트레스에 대한 저항 능력을 가지고 있으나 닭의장풀은 수분 스트레스에 취약했다. 수분 스트레스 전 닭의장풀의 수분 함유량은 돌나물보다 약 6% 많으며, 생장률이 매우 빠르며 열매를 맺는다. 반면에 돌나물은 생장이 느리며, 줄기의 길이 증가도 닭의장풀에 비해 작았다. 잘 성숙된 닭의장풀은 키가 1m에 이르는 것도 있으나, 돌나물은 포복경의 특성으로 인해, 실제 줄기의 생장은 30cm를 넘지 못한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Adams WW, CB Osmond and TD Sharkey. 1987. Responses of two CAM species to different irradiances during growth and susceptibility to photoinhibition by high light. Plant Physiol. 83:213-218 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.83.1.213
  2. Carnal NW and CC Black. 1987. Soluble sugars as the carbohydrate reserve for CAM in pineapple leaves: Implications for the role of pyrophosphate 6-Phosphofructokinase in glycolysis. Plant Physiol. 90:91-110
  3. Cote FX, M Andre, M Folliot, D Massimino and A Daguenet. 1989. $CO_{2}$ and $O_{2}$ exchanges in the CAM plant Ananas comosus (L.) merr: Determination of total and malate-decorbocylation-dependent $CO_{2}$-assimilation rates; study of light $O_{2}$-uptake. Plant Physiol. 89:61-68 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.89.1.61
  4. Demming B and O Bjorkman. 1987. Comparison of the effect of excessive high of chlorophyll fluorescence (77k) and photon yield of $O_{2}$- evolution in leaves of higher plants. Planta 171:171-184 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00391092
  5. de Jong T, B Drake and R Pearcy. 1982. Gas exchange responses of Chesapeak Bay tidal marsh species under field and laboratory conditions. Oecologia 52:5-11 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00349004
  6. Edwards GE and D Walker. 1983. $C_{3}$, $C_{4}$: Mechanisms and cellular and Environmental Regulation of Photosynthesis, University of California Press, Berkeley. 653pp
  7. Harris FS and CE Martin. 1991. Correlation between CAM-Cycling and photosynthetic gas exchange in five species of Talinum (Portulacaceae). Plant Physiol. 96:1118-1124 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.96.4.1118
  8. Hasegawa S. 1979. Classification and geological distribution of $C_{3}$ and $C_{4}$ plants. Journal of Agricultural Meteorology, 34:195-200 (in Japanese) https://doi.org/10.2480/agrmet.34.195
  9. Hattersley P. 1983. The distribution of $C_{3}$ and $C_{4}$ grasses in Australia in relation to climate. Oecologia (Berlin), 57:113-128 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00379569
  10. Holden. 1965. Chlorophylls. pp. 461-488. In Goodwin TW (editor). Chemistry and biochemistry of plant pigments. Academic Press, New York
  11. Holthe PA, LD Sternberg and IP Ting. 1987. Developmental control of CAM in Peperomia scandens. Plant Physiol. 84: 743-747 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.84.3.743
  12. Hsiao TC. 1979. Plant responses to water deficits, efficiency and drought resistance, Agricult. Meteorol, 14:59-84
  13. Keeley JE and G Busch. 1984. Carbon assimilation characteristics of the aquatic CAM plant, Isoetes howellii. Plant Physiol. 76:525-530 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.76.2.525
  14. Kim DJ and JS Lee. 2007. Current theories for mechanism of stomatal opening. J. Plant Biol. 50(5):523-526 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03030704
  15. Lee JS. 2005. The effects of ABA on $Cd^{2+}$-induced physiological responses in Commelina communis L. 23(1):47-51
  16. Lee JS and DJF Bowling. 1992. Effect of the mesophyll on stomatal opening in Commelina communis, J. Exp. Bot. 252: 951-957
  17. Loomis R and P Gerakis. 1975. Productivity of agricultural ecosystems. In Photosynthesis and Productivity in Different Environments (ed. Cooper, J.P.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp.145-172
  18. Maroco JP, MSB Ku, PJ Lea, LE Dever, LV Leegood, RC Furbank and GE Edwards. 1998, Oxygen requirement and inhibition of $C_{4}$ photosynthesis, Plant Physiol. 116:823-832 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.116.2.823
  19. Oh HH and CH Lee. 1996. Dissembly of chlorophyll-protein complex in Arabidopsis thaliana during dark induced folier senescence. J. Plant Biol. 39(4):301-304
  20. Oquist G, WS Chow and JM Anderson. 1992. Photoinhibition of photosynthesis represents a mechanism for the long term regulation of photosystem II, Planta 186:450-460
  21. Patel A and IP Ting. 1987. Relationship between respiration and CAM-Cycling in Peperomia camptotricha, Plant Physiol. 84: 640-642 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.84.3.640
  22. Schreider U. 1997. Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthetic energy conversion. Walz, Germany. 856pp
  23. Sternberg LD, M Deniro and HB Johnson. 1986. Oxygen and hydrogen isotope ratios of water from photosynthetic tissues of CAM and $C_{3}$ plants. Plant Physiol. 82:428-431 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.82.2.428
  24. Taiz L and E Zeiger. 2003. Plant Physiology, 3th edn., Sunderland, Sinauet Associates. 690pp
  25. Teeri JA and LG Stowe. 1976. Climatic patterns and the distribution of $C_{4}$ grasses in North America. Oecologia, 23:1-12 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00351210
  26. Wu MX and RT Wedding. 1987. Temperature effects on phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase from a CAM and a $C_{4}$ plant: A comparative study. Plant Physiol. 85:497-501 https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.85.2.497