Farms.com Home   News

Superior Photosynthesis Abilities of Some Plants Could Hold Key to Climate-Resilient Crops

More than 3 billion years ago, on an Earth entirely covered with water, photosynthesis first evolved in little ancient bacteria. In the following many millions of years, those bacteria evolved into plants, optimizing themselves along the way for various environmental changes. This evolution was punctuated around 30 million years ago with the emergence of a newer, better way to photosynthesize. While plants like rice continued using an old form of photosynthesis known as C3, others like corn and sorghum developed a newer and more efficient version called C4.

There are now more than 8,000 different C4 plant species, which grow particularly well in hot, dry climates and are some of the most productive crop species in the world. However, the vast majority of plants still run on C3 photosynthesis. So how did C4 plants come to be, and could C3 plants ever get a similar update?

Now, for the first time ever, Salk scientists and collaborators at the University of Cambridge discovered a key step C4 plants like sorghum needed to take to evolve to become so efficient at photosynthesizing—and how we could use this information to make crops like rice, wheat, and soybeans more productive and resilient against our warming climate.

The findings were published in Nature on November 20, 2024.

“Asking what makes C3 and C4 plants different is not just important from the basic biological perspective of wanting to know why something evolved and how it functions on the molecular level,” says Professor Joseph Ecker, senior author of the study, Salk International Council Chair in Genetics, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. “Answering this question is a huge step toward understanding how we can make the most robust and productive crops possible in the face of climate change and a growing global population.”

Around 95% of plants use C3 photosynthesis, in which mesophyll cells—green spongy cells that live inside leaves—turn light, water, and carbon dioxide into plant-powering sugars. Despite its high prevalence, C3 photosynthesis has two major shortcomings: 1) 20% of the time, oxygen is accidentally used instead of carbon dioxide and must be recycled, which slows down the process and wastes energy, and 2) pores on the leaf surface are open too frequently while waiting for carbon dioxide to enter, causing the plant to lose water and become more vulnerable to drought and heat.

Fortunately, evolution has solved these issues with C4 photosynthesis. C4 plants recruit bundle sheath cells, which normally serve as leaf vein support, to photosynthesize alongside mesophyll cells. As a result, C4 plants eliminate those oxygen-use mistakes to conserve energy and keep plant surface pores closed more often to conserve water. The result is a 50% increase in efficiency compared to C3 plants.

But on the molecular level, what made C3 plants turn into C4 plants? And could scientists prompt C3 crops to become C4 crops?

To answer these questions, Salk scientists employed cutting-edge, single-cell genomics technology to look at the difference between C3 rice and C4 sorghum. While previous methods were too imprecise to distinguish neighboring cells like mesophyll and bundle sheath cells, single-cell genomics allowed the team to investigate the genetic and structural changes in each cell type from both plants.

"We were surprised and excited to find that the difference between C3 and C4 plants is not the removal or addition of specific genes,” says Ecker. “Rather, the difference is on a regulatory level, which could make it easier for us in the long run to turn on more efficient C4 photosynthesis in C3 crops.”

All cells within an organism contain the same genes, but which genes are expressed at any given time is what determines each cell’s identity and function. One way that gene expression can be modified is through the activity of transcription factors. These proteins recognize and bind to small stretches of DNA near the genes, called regulatory elements. Once in position at the regulatory element, a transcription factor can help turn the nearby genes “on” or “off.”

When measuring gene expression in rice and sorghum plants, the scientists found that a transcription factor family commonly referred to as DOFs were in charge of turning on the genes to make bundle sheath cells in both species. They also noticed that DOFs were binding to the same regulatory element in both species. However, in C4 sorghum plants, this regulatory element was not only associated with bundle sheath identity genes—it was also turning on the photosynthesis genes. That suggested that C4 plants had at some point tacked ancestral regulatory elements for bundle sheath genes onto photosynthesis genes, so that DOFs would turn on both sets of genes at the same time. This would explain how bundle sheath cells in C4 plants gained the ability to photosynthesize.

These experiments revealed that both C3 and C4 plants contain the necessary genes and transcription factors required for the superior C4 photosynthesis process—a promising discovery for scientists hoping to nudge C3 plants to use C4 photosynthesis.

“Now we’ve got this blueprint for how different plants utilize the sun’s energy to survive in different environments,” says Joseph Swift, co-first author of the study and a postdoctoral researcher in Ecker’s lab. “The ultimate goal is to try to switch C4 photosynthesis on and, in turn, create more productive and resilient crops for the future.”

Next on the docket for the team is determining whether rice can be engineered to use C4 photosynthesis rather than C3. This remains a very long-term goal with significant technical challenges that are being addressed by a global collaborative effort known as the “C4 Rice Project.” More immediately, the findings will inform the Salk Harnessing Plants Initiative’s mission to create optimized crops that simultaneously fight and withstand the threat of climate change.

Their single-cell genomics data has also been shared as a resource for scientists around the world, quickly garnering excitement for its answers to this long-standing mystery in evolution.

Other authors include Travis Lee and Joseph Nery of Salk, as well as Leonie Luginbuehl, Lei Hua, Tina Schreier, Ruth Donald, Susan Stanley, Na Wang, and Julian Hibberd of the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom.

The work was supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, C4 Rice Project, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Life Sciences Research Foundation, Herchel Smith Fellowship, and European Molecular Biology Organization.

Source : salk.edu

Trending Video

Turning Plant Defense Into a Management Strategy

Video: Turning Plant Defense Into a Management Strategy

Turning Plant Defense Into a Management Strategy

Understanding how a plant responds to stress is one thing.

Using that knowledge to make better management decisions is another.

Systemic acquired resistance, or SAR, is the plant's more direct defense response. When stress or infection occurs, the plant begins signaling throughout its system and preparing defensive compounds.

But if we know that response exists, can we help prepare the plant before the stress arrives?

The answer starts with understanding what triggers the response and what the plant needs to carry it out.

The Trigger and the Fuel

Salicylic acid plays an important role in triggering the SAR pathway.

Think of it as turning the truck on.

The engine may be running, but it still needs fuel to do the work.

In this case, manganese plays an important role in supporting the enzyme systems involved in the plant's defensive response.

This makes manganese status an important part of the conversation. Whether a producer is using tissue testing, sap analysis, or simply scouting for visible deficiency symptoms, the goal is to make sure the plant has adequate manganese available.

Manganese is required in relatively small amounts, but that does not make its role small.

If the plant receives a signal to defend itself but lacks the nutrition needed to support that response, it may struggle to carry out the process efficiently.

The trigger matters.

The fuel matters too.

Prepare Before the Stress Arrives

The best time to think about stress management is before the plant is overwhelmed.

Once a crop is already struggling, management can quickly turn into a game of catch-up.

This is similar to nitrogen management. Once a plant becomes severely deficient, correcting the problem does not necessarily erase the time and yield potential already lost.

Plant defense can work the same way.

Low-rate, targeted approaches designed to support the SAR pathway may fit best ahead of an expected stress event rather than after significant damage has already occurred.

That requires producers to think about predictable stress.

We may not know exactly what the weather will do tomorrow, but we generally know summer heat is coming. We know certain field conditions increase disease pressure. We know a herbicide application can temporarily stress a crop as the plant processes the chemistry.

Even a properly timed and labeled herbicide application can create a temporary response in the plant.

That does not mean the herbicide is bad.

Weeds can create significantly more yield loss than the temporary stress caused by controlling them.

The question is not whether we should eliminate every stressor.

The question is whether we can better prepare the plant to manage necessary and predictable stress.

Not All Stress Is Bad

Stress is a normal part of plant growth.

A perfectly stress-free environment does not exist in the field.

In fact, some stress is necessary for normal plant development. A plant responds to wind, temperature, moisture, sunlight, and countless other environmental signals throughout the season.

The environment is stress.

The plant's job is to manage it.

Problems begin when the stress load becomes greater than the plant's ability to respond.

Extreme heat, drought, high salt concentrations, disease pressure, and even certain management practices can add to that load.

This is where understanding SAR becomes useful.

Instead of waiting until the plant is visibly struggling, producers can begin identifying periods when stress is likely and make management decisions around those windows.

ISR Starts With the Soil

While SAR is a more direct defense response, induced systemic resistance, or ISR, brings the conversation back to soil health.

The longevity of a farm is closely connected to the health of its soil.

Carbon plays a major role because it supports biological life within the soil. Bacteria, fungi, and other organisms interact with plant roots and influence how the plant grows, accesses nutrients, and prepares for stress.

This is why soil health cannot be reduced to one product or one application.

It is a system.

Keeping living plants in the field longer can support biological activity. Cover crops may fit some operations. Better water management can improve soil conditions.