C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (2024)

Abstract

C4 photosynthesis is a complex set of leaf anatomical and biochemical adaptations that have evolved more than 60 times to boost carbon uptake compared with the ancestral C3 photosynthetic type13. Although C4 photosynthesis has the potential to drive faster growth rates4,5, experiments directly comparing C3 and C4 plants have not shown consistent effects1,6,7. This is problematic because differential growth is a crucial element of ecological theory8,9 explaining C4 savannah responses to global change10,11, and research to increase C3 crop productivity by introducing C4 photosynthesis12. Here, we resolve this long-standing issue by comparing growth across 382 grass species, accounting for ecological diversity and evolutionary history. C4 photosynthesis causes a 19–88% daily growth enhancement. Unexpectedly, during the critical seedling establishment stage, this enhancement is driven largely by a high ratio of leaf area to mass, rather than fast growth per unit leaf area. C4 leaves have less dense tissues, allowing more leaves to be produced for the same carbon cost. Consequently, C4 plants invest more in roots than C3 species. Our data demonstrate a general suite of functional trait divergences between C3 and C4 species, which simultaneously drive faster growth and greater investment in water and nutrient acquisition, with important ecological and agronomic implications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Change institution

Buy or subscribe

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

$119.00 per year

only $9.92 per issue

Learn more

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (1)
C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (2)
C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (3)

Similar content being viewed by others

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (4)

Modeling photosynthetic resource allocation connects physiology with evolutionary environments

Article Open access 05 August 2021

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (5)

Developmental and biophysical determinants of grass leaf size worldwide

Article 24 March 2021

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (6)

Global climate and nutrient controls of photosynthetic capacity

Article Open access 12 April 2021

References

  1. Christin, P.-A. & Osborne, C. P. The evolutionary ecology of C4 plants. New Phytol. 204, 765–781 (2014).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  2. Sage, R. F., Christin, P.-A. & Edwards, E. J. The C4 plant lineages of planet Earth. J. Exp. Bot. 62, 3155–3169 (2011).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  3. Hatch, M. D. & Slack, C. R. Photosynthesis by sugar-cane leaves. A new carboxylation reaction and the pathway of sugar formation. Biochem. J. 101, 103–111 (1966).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  4. Monteith, J. L. Reassessment of maximum growth rates for C3 and C4 crops. Exp. Agr. 14, 1–5 (1978).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  5. Zhu, X.-G., Long, S. P. & Ort, D. R. Improving photosynthetic efficiency for greater yield. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol. 61, 235–261 (2010).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  6. Snaydon, R. W. The productivity of C3 and C4 plants: a reassessment. Funct. Ecol. 5, 321–330 (1991).

    Article Google Scholar

  7. Long, S. P. in C4 Plant Biology (eds Sage, R. F. & Monson, R. K. ) Ch. 7, 215–249 (Academic, 1999).

    Book Google Scholar

  8. Ehleringer, J. R. Implications of quantum yield differences on the distributions of C3 and C4 grasses. Oecologia 31, 255–267 (1978).

    Article Google Scholar

  9. Ehleringer, J. R., Cerling, T. E. & Helliker, B. R. C4 photosynthesis, atmospheric CO2, and climate. Oecologia 112, 285–299 (1997).

    Article Google Scholar

  10. Still, C. J., Berry, J. A., Collatz, G. J. & DeFries, R. S. Global distribution of C3 and C4 vegetation: carbon cycle implications. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 17, 1006 (2003).

    Article Google Scholar

  11. Edwards, E. J., Osborne, C. P. & Stromberg, C. A. The origins of C4 grasslands: integrating evolutionary and ecosystem science. Science 328, 587–591 (2010).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  12. von Caemmerer, S., Quick, W. P. & Furbank, R. T. The development of C4 rice: current progress and future challenges. Science 336, 1671–1672 (2012).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  13. Parr, C. L., Lehmann, C. E. R., Bond, W. J., Hoffmann, W. A. & Andersen, A. N. Tropical grassy biomes: misunderstood, neglected, and under threat. Trends Ecol. Evolut. 29, 205–213 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  14. Grass Phylogeny Working Group II. New grass phylogeny resolves deep evolutionary relationships and discovers C4 origins. New Phytol. 193, 304–312 (2012).

    Article Google Scholar

  15. Rees, M. et al. Partitioning the components of relative growth rate: how important is plant size variation? Am. Nat. 176, E152–E161 (2010).

    Article Google Scholar

  16. Grime, J. P. et al. Integrated screening validates primary axes of specialisation in plants. Oikos 79, 259–281 (1997).

    Article Google Scholar

  17. Black, C. C., Chen, T. M. & Brown, R. H. Biochemical basis for plant competition. Weed Sci. 17, 338–344 (1969).

    CAS Google Scholar

  18. Sage, R. F. & Pearcy, R. W. The nitrogen use efficiency of C3 and C4 Plants. 1. Leaf nitrogen, growth, and biomass partitioning in Chenopodium album (L) and Amaranthus retroflexus (L). Plant Physiol. 84, 954–958 (1987).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  19. Poorter, H., Remkes, C. & Lambers, H. Carbon and nitrogen economy of 24 wild species differing in relative growth rate. Plant Physiol. 94, 621–627 (1990).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  20. Taylor, S. H. et al. Ecophysiological traits in C3 and C4 grasses: a phylogenetically controlled screening experiment. New Phytol. 185, 780–791 (2010).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  21. Ghannoum, O., Von Caemmerer, S., Ziska, L. H. & Conroy, J. P. The growth response of C4 plants to rising atmospheric CO2 partial pressure: a reassessment. Plant Cell Environ. 23, 931–942 (2000).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  22. Kiær, L. P., Weisbach, A. N. & Weiner, J. Root and shoot competition: a meta-analysis. J. Ecol. 101, 1298–1312 (2013).

    Article Google Scholar

  23. Atkinson, R. R. L., Burrell, M. M., Osborne, C. P., Rose, K. E. & Rees, M. A non-targeted metabolomics approach to quantifying differences in root storage between fast- and slow-growing plants. New Phytol. 196, 200–211 (2012).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  24. Ghannoum, O., Evans, J. & von Caemmerer, S. in C4 Photosynthesis and Related CO2 Concentrating Mechanisms Vol. 32 Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration (eds Raghavendra, A. S. & Sage, R. F. ) Ch. 8, 129–146 (Springer Netherlands, 2011).

    Google Scholar

  25. Shipley, B. & Vu, T.-T. Dry matter content as a measure of dry matter concentration in plants and their parts. New Phytol. 153, 359–364 (2002).

    Article Google Scholar

  26. Christin, P. A. et al. Anatomical enablers and the evolution of C4 photosynthesis in grasses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 1381–1386 (2013).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  27. Byott, G. S. Leaf air space systems in C3 and C4 species. New Phytol. 76, 295–299 (1976).

    Article Google Scholar

  28. Stata, M. et al. Mesophyll cells of C4 plants have fewer chloroplasts than those of closely related C3 plants. Plant Cell Environ. 37, 2587–2600 (2014).

    Article CAS Google Scholar

  29. Ocheltree, T. W., Nippert, J. B. & Vara Prasad, P. V. A safety vs efficiency trade-off identified in the hydraulic pathway of grass leaves is decoupled from photosynthesis, stomatal conductance and precipitation. New Phytol. 210, 97–107.

  30. Hewitt, E. J. Sand and water culture methods used in the study of plant nutrition (Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, 1966).

    Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by a Natural Environment Research Council grant (NE/I014322/1) awarded to C.P.O., M.R., R.P.F. and K.T. P.A.C. thanks The Royal Society for support from a University Research Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK

    Rebecca R. L. Atkinson,Emily J. Mockford,Christopher Bennett,Pascal-Antoine Christin,Robert P. Freckleton,Ken Thompson,Mark Rees&Colin P. Osborne

  2. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, New Haven, 06520-8105, Connecticut, USA

    Elizabeth L. Spriggs

Authors

  1. Rebecca R. L. Atkinson

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  2. Emily J. Mockford

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  3. Christopher Bennett

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  4. Pascal-Antoine Christin

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  5. Elizabeth L. Spriggs

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  6. Robert P. Freckleton

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  7. Ken Thompson

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  8. Mark Rees

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

  9. Colin P. Osborne

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMedGoogle Scholar

Contributions

C.P.O., R.P.F., K.T. and M.R. conceived the project. R.R.L.A., R.P.F., K.T., M.R. and C.P.O. designed the experiments. R.R.L.A., E.J.M. and C.B. carried out the experiments and compiled the data. P.A.C. and E.L.S. sequenced DNA and built the phylogeny. R.R.L.A. and M.R. analysed experimental data. R.R.L.A., M.R. and C.P.O. wrote the paper. All authors interpreted the results and commented on the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Colin P. Osborne.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

About this article

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (7)

Cite this article

Atkinson, R., Mockford, E., Bennett, C. et al. C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size. Nature Plants 2, 16038 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.38

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.38

This article is cited by

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size (2024)

FAQs

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size? ›

Scientists discover C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering size and structure of plant leaves and roots. Plants using C4 photosynthesis grow 20-100 per cent quicker than more common C3 plants by altering the shape, size and structure of their leaves and roots, according to a new study.

What is the main advantage of C4 photosynthesis? ›

C4 plants make more efficient use of available light than their C3 relatives, particularly at high temperatures; this makes C4 plants particularly successful in areas with high light, low water, and low nutrients.

What does C4 do in photosynthesis? ›

In C4 photosynthesis, where a four-carbon compound is produced, unique leaf anatomy allows carbon dioxide to concentrate in 'bundle sheath' cells around Rubisco. This structure delivers carbon dioxide straight to Rubisco, effectively removing its contact with oxygen and the need for photorespiration.

What is the significance of the C4 pathway in photosynthesis? ›

The C4 pathway increases the photosynthetic yield of plants by 2 to 3 times as compared to C3 plants. The C4 plants can perform photosynthesis at a very high rate even when the stomata are nearly closed. The C4 pathway increases the adaptability of C4 plants to survive in high temperature and high like intensity areas.

Why is C4 photosynthesis advantageous to plants growing in hot dry regions? ›

Why are C4 plants more suited to hot climates than C3 plants? They do not close their stomata in hot, dry weather. They evolved in cold weather but migrated to the tropics, where they were more suitable. They suspend photosynthesis in the heat.

What is the benefit to C4 photosynthesis compared to C3? ›

C4 photosynthesis is more efficient than C3 photosynthesis in warmer climates, where yield potential is high. The lower photosynthetic efficiency in C3 plants is due to a dual activity in the enzyme that fixes CO2, Ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (RuBisCO; Brown et al., 2011).

How is C4 photosynthesis more efficient? ›

Under high temperature, high light, and the current CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, the C4 pathway is more efficient than C3 photosynthesis because it increases the CO2 concentration around the major CO2 fixating enzyme Rubisco. The oxygenase reaction and, accordingly, photorespiration are largely suppressed.

What is the disadvantage of C4 photosynthesis? ›

By contrast, with their adaptations, C4 plants are not as limited by carbon dioxide, and under elevated carbon dioxide levels, the growth of C4 plants did not increase as much as C3 plants. In field studies with elevated carbon dioxide levels, yields of C4 plants were also not higher (Taub, 2010).

What is the product of C4 photosynthesis? ›

So, the correct option is 'Oxaloacetic acid'.

What is C4 and what is it used for? ›

Civilians may use C-4 as an initiator for other explosives or in underwa- ter seismic charges. RDX, the explosive component of C-4, is also used in blasting caps and in other commercial explosives.

What is the purpose of the C4 pathway quizlet? ›

C4 plants have a growth advantage over C3 plants in hot climates because of reduced rates of photorespiration. Sugarcane plants and crabgrass grow in a hot and humid tropical climate and use the C4 pathway for CO2 fixation.

What are the examples of C4 photosynthesis? ›

The advantage of C4 plants is that the carbon dioxide fixation and Calvin cycle take place in different parts of the leaf which minimizes photorespiration and efficiently fixes carbon dioxide. C4 plants are usually found in hot regions. Examples of C4 plants are corn, sorghum, and sugarcane.

What is the purpose of C4 and CAM photosynthesis? ›

Plants that use CAM photosynthesis collect sunlight during the day and fix CO2 molecules at night. Answer: The primary distinction between C4 and CAM plants is how they minimise water loss. C4 plants move CO2 molecules to reduce photorespiration, whereas CAM plants decide when to extract CO2 from the environment.

What are the benefits of the C4 pathway? ›

The mechanism of CO2 concentration, the higher CO2 assimilation capacity, and the reduction of stomatal conductance help C4 plants maintain higher rates of carbon gain compared to C3 plants [19,20], 50–300% higher water use efficiency [20], and higher nitrogen use efficiency [21,22].

What is the main advantage of C4 photosynthesis to prevent? ›

Identify the advantages of C4 photosynthesis

Lower photorespiration: In the C4 pathway, CO2 is concentrated around RuBisCO, which increases the ratio of CO2 to O2, reducing the chance of RuBisCO binding with oxygen. This leads to a significant reduction in photorespiration.

Why is C4 photosynthesis expected to be an adaptation to dry conditions? ›

C4 and CAM photosynthesis are both adaptations to arid conditions, because they are more efficient in the conservation of water. CAM plants are also able to “idle,” thus saving energy and water during periods of harsh conditions.

What is the main advantage for plants that use the C4 pathway in addition to the Calvin cycle for the fixation of carbon dioxide? ›

The advantages of C4 photosynthesis, such as lower photorespiration and higher efficiency in high temperatures, light intensity, and low CO2 conditions, allow C4 plants to thrive better in tropical and subtropical regions, arid areas, or locations with high solar radiation.

What is the main advantage of the C4 and CAM types of photosynthesis over C3 photosynthesis? ›

Answer and Explanation:

C4 and CAM strategies both reduce photorespiration that occurs in a higher amount in C3 photosynthesis. They use phosphoenolpyruvate for the fixation of carbon dioxide. PEP does not react with oxygen that is the reason for reduced photorespiration in C4 photosynthesis.

What is the main adaptive advantage of the C4 and CAM photosynthesis? ›

The main adaptive advantage of the C4 and CAM photosynthesis strategies over the C3 strategy primarily lies in their ability to help the plant conserve water and synthesize glucose efficiently under hot, dry conditions.

What is the advantage of the C4 photosynthetic pathway as compared to the conventional C3 pathway? ›

The advantage of the C4 pathway lies in its CO2 concentration mechanism, which minimizes the oxidation reaction, thereby avoiding the occurrence of photorespiration as much as possible.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Nathanial Hackett

Last Updated:

Views: 5529

Rating: 4.1 / 5 (72 voted)

Reviews: 87% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Nathanial Hackett

Birthday: 1997-10-09

Address: Apt. 935 264 Abshire Canyon, South Nerissachester, NM 01800

Phone: +9752624861224

Job: Forward Technology Assistant

Hobby: Listening to music, Shopping, Vacation, Baton twirling, Flower arranging, Blacksmithing, Do it yourself

Introduction: My name is Nathanial Hackett, I am a lovely, curious, smiling, lively, thoughtful, courageous, lively person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.