Skip to main content

Joint interactions of carbon and nitrogen metabolism dominated by bicarbonate and nitrogen in Orychophragmus violaceus and Brassica napus under simulated karst habitats

Abstract

Karst habitats are uniquely characterized by high bicarbonate, high nitrate, and low ammonium, which are in-conducive to their growth and biodiversity. The occurrence of inorganic carbon and nitrogen in karst soil profoundly affects the carbon/nitrogen metabolism and adaptability of plants. However, there has been no final conclusion to the joint interactions of carbon and nitrogen metabolism in plants under karst habitats. In this study, we selected a karst-adaptable plant Orychophragmus violaceus (Ov), and a non-karst-adaptable plant Brassica napus (Bn) as experimental plants, and compared their joint effects of carbon and nitrogen metabolism under simulated karst habitats. It was found that the two species had different joint effects of carbon and nitrogen metabolisms. Bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted photosynthetic activity and glucose metabolism, facilitating the carbon/nitrogen metabolism and growth of Ov, but their impacts on the carbon and nitrogen metabolism were insignificant in Bn. Bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited the photosynthesis and nitrogen metabolism, but promoted water use efficiency in Ov, leading to its enhance of growth reduction, ammonium toxicity alleviation, and drought resistance, while they inhibited the water use efficiency of Bn. In general, bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium more significantly joint affected the carbon and nitrogen metabolism in Ov than Bn, which is vital for Ov to adapt to karst habitats.

Background

Karst habitats, featuring drought, high bicarbonate, high nitrate and low ammonium, can cause ecological degradation, which has attracted widespread attention [1]. The formation of karst habitats is complex. On the one hand, the karst process promotes the formation of skylights and caves, which are in-conducive to water storage and thus lead to a karst drought adversity [2]. On the other hand, soils formed by carbonate contribute to the abundance of bicarbonate, consuming lots of H+ and thus creating a high pH habitat. Besides, ammonium in such habitats will change into ammonia through volatilization due to its high pH, resulting in a nitrate-abundant and ammonium-low environment [3]. Most plant species are non-adaptable to a karst habitat because their photosynthesis will be inhibited due to disrupted water balance and conductance [4, 5], while a few are well adaptable to it thanks to their unique strategies of inorganic carbon and nitrogen metabolism.

In addition to atmospheric carbon dioxide, dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) existing in carbon dioxide (CO2) and bicarbonate (HCO3) was demonstrated to be able to participate in the carbon assimilation. The pH value determines the carbon forms, and as the pH increase, DIC in water medium is mainly in the form of HCO3, which are used by algae and plants, such as Orychophragmus violaceus [1], Chlamydomonas reinhardtii [6], Camptotheca acuminata [7], Potamogeton crispus and Potamogeton malaianus [8, 9]. In a karst habitat, carbon dioxide and bicarbonate are alternatively used by plants and the latter can promote carbon assimilation and improve water availability as well as glucose metabolism [10]. Carbonic anhydrase (CA) catalyzes HCO3 to CO2 and H2O, contributing to maintaining photosynthesis [1, 2]. Furthermore, bicarbonate is involved in total inorganic carbon assimilation, and contributes 9.71% to the total inorganic carbon assimilation in Camptotheca acuminate under simulated karst drought [7]. It can also adjust the glucose metabolism in plants. Yao [10] indicated that 3 mM bicarbonate increased both the glycolytic pathway (EMP) and the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) of Broussonetia papyrifera (Bp), resulting in the enhancement of the total glucose metabolism. Nitrate and ammonium are the primary inorganic nitrogen utilized by plants, and the former is the primary nitrogen source for most plants under aerobic soil conditions [11, 12]. Typically, nitrate also plays an important role in physiological processes [13], but energy and NADPH/NADH reducing agents are required for plants to uptake it. Compared to ammonium, nitrate is theoretically more accessible for plants, but nitrate reduction requires 15 ATP, whereas ammonium assimilation requires only 5 ATP [14]. However, excessive ammonium leads to intracellular acidification and vein damage, which will result in the decline of photosynthetic products and plant growth [15]. In general, both nitrate nitrogen and ammonium nitrogen are necessary for the growth of most plants, and their distribution in soil determines the nitrogen utilization characteristics of plants [16,17,18]. Therefore, it is crucial to figure out the effects of nitrate and ammonium on the nitrogen utilization characteristics in plants. A karst habitat features nitrate-abundant and ammonium-rare soil, where karst-adaptable plants can better survive than non-karst-adaptable plants [1]. Lu [19] indicated that Ov would have higher nitrate utilization than Bn under simulated karst habitats. While these studies describe the utilization of inorganic carbon or nitrogen by plants in karst habitats, the symbiotic metabolism of these two elements remains unclear.

The carbon and nitrogen metabolisms of plants are closely coupled by energy and carbon skeletons. On the one hand, carbon assimilation affects nitrate reduction through the energy produced by photosynthesis, while the glycolytic pathway (EMP) supplies ATP to the nitrogen metabolism and recycles 75%of the cycle [20]. On the other hand, one ammonium ion released in mitochondria during serine biosynthesis from two glycines is re-assimilated in chloroplast by reduced ferridoxin. Meanwhile, nitrogen reduction not only provides enzymes and protein for photothesis, EMP and PPP, which are vital carbon skeletons of carbon metabolism, but also offers nitrogen to the composition of chlorophyll [17] as well as NAPDH to the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) [18]. The carbon metabolism includes photosynthesis, EMP, PPP, and enzymes such as Ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase oxygenase (Rubisco) and sucrose synthetase (SS) [21,22,23]. In contrast, the nitrogen metabolism contains nitrate reduction and ammonium assimilation, which are obviously affected by nitrate reductase (NR) and glutamate synthase (GOGAT) [24]. The above indicators determine the carbon and nitrogen growth in plants regarding biomass and accumulation. Consequently, the above coupling relationships were determined to clarify the joint effects of carbon and nitrogen metabolisms in plants.

In a karst habitat, bicarbonate, nitrate, and ammonium have a profound influence on the inorganic carbon and nitrogen metabolisms [1, 2], and therefore it is essential to clarify the conjugation of bicarbonate, nitrate, and ammonium to carbon and nitrogen metabolism in plants. However, the growth in plants is influenced by multiple factors, such as climate, rainfall, and biodiversity, making it difficult to quantify the conjugation of carbon and nitrogen metabolisms [3, 19]. In this study, we simulated karst habitats in an artificial greenhouse, and then cultivated the Orychophragmus violaceus (Ov, karst-adaptable plant) and Brassica napus (Bn, non-karst-adaptable plant) to determine the joint effects of carbon and nitrogen metabolisms on different plant species. The followings are the main objectives of this study: (1) to compare the differential joint effects on the carbon and nitrogen metabolisms of bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium in different plant species under the environment of a simulated karst habitat; (2) to determine the karst adapting mechanisms of carbon and nitrogen in karst-adaptable plants.

Methods

Plant materials

The experiments were carried out in an artificial greenhouse at the Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Guiyang, China) with a dimension of 10 (L) × 5 (W) × 4 (H) m. The light was provided by metal halide lamps (HPI-T400W/645, Philips, the Netherlands) while the temperature was controlled by air conditioning. Seedlings were then incubated in a photoperiod of 16/8 h under light/dark conditions, along with 500 ± 23 μmol m− 2 s− 1 of photosynthetic photon flux density. The greenhouse conditions were set as:temperature (day/night): 25/19 °C, constant light time of 12 h per day; relative humidity range: 55–60%. In this study, we selected Ov (karst-adaptable plant) and Bn (non-karst adaptable plant) as experimental plants and disinfected the seeds with 70% ethanol for 1 min with constant agitation. Additionally, the seeds were repeatedly rinsed 3–5 times and soaked for 6–8 h. The seeds were sown in 12-hole trays (size: 19 × 15 × 9.5 cm) and grown on a substrate (perlite: vermiculite = 1:3) with the modified Hoagland solution [2], which was changed every 3 days. After 28 days, the seedlings were transplanted and followed by 48 h without nitrogen. Finally, we chose 48 plants with uniform growth of Ov and Bn and randomly divided them into 16 groups (3 plants each group), so as to the following stress treatments.

Stress treatments

The continuous rainfall cycle in karst areas is usually 1–8 days, so karst drought (PEG6000, 10 g/L) was simulated for 8 days to cultivate Bn and Ov seedlings (Table 1). The bicarbonate of wet soil is more than 10 mM under karst habitats. Therefore, 10 mM of NaHCO3 was prepared to simulate the bicarbonate environment, and the pH was adjusted to 8.30 ± 0.05 with 1 mol/L KOH so that the bicarbonate exists in an alkaline environment [2, 5]. Quantitatively, the culture solution was changed daily at 9:00 a.m., and the soil water content was maintained at 20–25%. Equal amounts of plants were assigned to the measurement of the photosynthesis, carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzymes, leaf carbon and nitrogen contents, and biomass.

Table 1 The condition of simulated karst habitats

Photosynthesis

Photosynthesis was measured with a portable photosynthesis measurement system (LI-COR, Lincoln, USA), of which the parameters were manually set: light intensity: 500 μmol m− 2 s− 1 PPFD; temperature: 25 °C; CO2 concentration: 400 μmol m− 2 s− 1. Photosynthetic parameters include net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (Cond), transpiration rate (Tr), and intercellular carbon dioxide (Ci). They were measured on the third cotyledon every 2 days, and we calculated the water use efficiency (1).

$$\mathrm{WUE}\;\left(\%\right)=\mathrm{Pn}/\mathrm{Tr}$$
(1)

The carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzymes

0.1 G of Ov and Bn fresh leaves (the 3rd or 4th euphylla of the seedling) were weighed and ground with liquid nitrogen. Then, the rubisco, SS, NR, GOGAT, PFK (APFK) and G6PDH activity (AG6PDH) were tested with the bio enzyme kit (Sangon, Shanghai, China)

The total glucose metabolism activity (EA), EMP and PPP, GC and RCRUBP were calculated by the methods adopted by Yao and Wu [10].

$${\mathrm{EA}}_{\sum }={\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{PFK}}+{\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{G}6\mathrm{PDH}}$$
(2)
$${\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{E}\mathrm{MP}}={\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{PFK}}/{\mathrm{E}\mathrm{A}}_{\sum }$$
(3)
$${\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{PPP}}={\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{G}6\mathrm{P}\mathrm{DH}}/{\mathrm{E}\mathrm{A}}_{\sum }$$
(4)
$$\mathrm{GC}={\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{E}\mathrm{MP}}\times \mathrm{Pn}$$
(5)
$${\mathrm{RC}}_{\mathrm{RUBP}}={\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{PPP}}\times \mathrm{Pn}$$
(6)

Leaf carbon and nitrogen content

15–25 mg of the dried Ov and Bn leaves were wrapped in the tin foil, the leaf carbon and nitrogen contents were measured with the elemental analyzer (Elementar, Germany).

Biomass

The plants were dissected into three parts, roots, stems and leaves, then were dried at 108 °C for 30 min and 75 °C after cleaning. The samples were weighed by analytical balance (accuracy 0.0001 g) to obtain the biomass and plants and calculate the root/shoot ratio(R/S, %).

$$\mathrm{R}/\mathrm{S}\;\left(\%\right)={\mathrm{Dw}}_{\mathrm{root}}/\left({\mathrm{Dw}}_{\mathrm{stem}}+{\mathrm{Dw}}_{\mathrm{leaves}}\right)\ast 100\%$$
(7)

Statistical analysis

The experimental data were processed as follows: the images were drawn with Origin 9.0; ANOVA, Duncan and LSD in SPSS 25 were used to analyze the data; and the differences between the means were considered significant when the p-value was less than 0.05. The data were expressed as “mean ± standard deviation”.

Results

Photosynthesis

In Fig. 1, only nitrate promoted the photosynthesis of Bn, and Pn increased significantly at B0N91; while bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium were not joint to promote the photosynthetic activity in Bn as they were insignificantly changed. Meanwhile, the Cond in Bn was promoted by the bicarbonate and nitrate joint and increased significantly at B10N91.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Photosynthetic characteristics of the Bn and Ov seedlings under simulated karst habitats. Pn-Photosynthetic rate, Cond-Stomatal conductivity, Tr-Transpiration, Ci-Intercellular CO2, WUE-water use efficiency, Bn-Brassica napus, and Ov-Orychophragmus violaceus. The bicarbonate was denoted as B0 (HCO3: 0 mM), and B10 (HCO3:10 mM). Nitrogen was denoted as N0(no nitrogen), N19 (nitrate:ammonium = 1 mM: 9 mM), N55 (nitrate:ammonium = 5 mM: 5 mM), and N91 (nitrate:ammonium = 9 mM: 1 mM). Each value represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). The mean values marked with different letters (a,b,c,d) significantly differ at P < 0.05

The bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the photosynthesis in Ov, of which Pn, Cond and WUE significantly increased at B10N91, while it inhibited Tr in Ov, which was significantly reduced at B10N91. The bicarbonate and ammonium joint only significantly promoted WUE in Ov, but inhibited the photosynthesis of Ov, resulting in a significant reduction in Pn, Cond, Tr, and Ci of Ov at B10N19.

Carbon and nitrogen metabolizing enzymes

In Fig. 2, only nitrate significantly promoted the activities of carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzymes, and the activities of Rubisco, SS, NR and GOGAT in Bn increased significantly with the increase of nitrate. By contrast, bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium were not jointd to affect the carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities, and the bicarbonate insignificantly changed the activities of Rubisco, SS, NRand GOGAT in Bn.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzymes of the Bn and Ov seedlings under simulated karst habitats. Bn, Brassica napus; Ov, Orychophragmus violaceus. The bicarbonate was denoted as B0 (HCO3: 0 mM), and B10 (HCO3:10 mM), respectively. Nitrogen was denoted as N0 (no nitrogen), N19 (nitrate:ammonium = 1 mM: 9 mM), N55 (nitrate:ammonium = 5 mM: 5 mM), and N91 (nitrate:ammonium = 9 mM: 1 mM). Each value represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). The mean values marked with different letters significantly differ at P < 0.05

Bicarbonate and nitrate were not jointd to affect the carbon and nitrogen metabolism enzymatic activities in Ov, and the activities of Rubisco, SS, NR and GOGAT were insignificantly changed at B10N91. The bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited the nitrogen metabolism enzymatic activities of Ov, and the activities of NR and GOGAT were significantly reduced at B10N19.

Glucose metabolism

In Fig. 3, only nitrate significantly promoted the glucose metabolism in Bn. With the increase of nitrate, EEMP and the total glucose metabolic activity significantly increased, while bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium were not joint to affect the glucose metabolism, and bicarbonate insignificantly changed EEMP, EPPP and the total glucose metabolic activity in Bn.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Glycolysis and pentose phosphate pathways of the Bn and Ov seedlings under simulated karst habitats. Bn, Brassica napus; Ov, Orychophragmus violaceus. The bicarbonate concentration denoted as B0 (HCO3: 0 mM), and B10(HCO3:10 mM). Nitrogen treatments were denoted as N0 (no nitrogen), N19 (nitrate:ammonium = 1 mM: 9 mM), N55 (nitrate:ammonium = 5 mM: 5 mM), and N91 (nitrate:ammonium = 9 mM: 1 mM). Each value represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). The mean values marked with different letters significantly differ at P < 0.05

The bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the glucose metabolism in Ov, with the total glucose metabolic activity significantly increasing at B10N91. The bicarbonate and ammonium were not joint to affect the glucose metabolism, without significant changes in EEMP, EPPP, and the total glucose metabolic activity at B10N19 in Ov.

The growth capacity and the regeneration capacity of RUBP

As shown in Fig. 4, only nitrate significantly promoted the growth capacity (GC) and the regeneration capacity of RUBP (RCRUBP) in Bn. With the increase of nitrate, GC and RCRUBP were promoted significantly, while bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the RCRUBP of Bn, which increased significantly at B10N91. However, bicarbonate and ammonium had no significant joint effect on GC and RCRUBP in Bn.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Growth capacity and regeneration capacity of RUBP in Bn and Ov under simulated karst habitats. Bn, Brassica napus; Ov, Orychophragmus violaceus. The bicarbonate was denoted as B0 (HCO3: 0 mM), and B10 (HCO3:10 mM). Nitrogen treatments were denoted as N0 (no nitrogen), N19 (nitrate:ammonium = 1 mM: 9 mM), N55 (nitrate:ammonium = 5 mM: 5 mM), and N91 (nitrate:ammonium = 9 mM: 1 mM). Each value represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). The mean values marked with different letters significantly differ at P < 0.05

The bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted GC in Ov, with a significant increase at B10N91, while the bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited it, with a significant decrease at B10N19.

Leaf carbon and nitrogen content in Bn and Ov

As shown in Fig. 5, only nitrate significantly promoted the leaf nitrogen content in Bn, which increased significantly at B0N91. In contrast, bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium had no significant joint effect on the leaf carbon and nitrogen content in Bn.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Carbon content, nitrogen content, and C/N ratio of the Bn and Ov under simulated karst habitats; Bn, Brassica napus; Ov, Orychophragmus violaceus. The bicarbonate was denoted as B0 (HCO3: 0 mM), and B10 (HCO3:10 mM). Nitrogen treatments were denoted as N0 (no nitrogen), N19 (nitrate:ammonium = 1 mM: 9 mM), N55 (nitrate:ammonium = 5 mM: 5 mM), and N91 (nitrate:ammonium = 9 mM: 1 mM). Each value represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). The mean values marked with different letters significantly differ at P < 0.05

The bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the leaf carbon/nitrogen content in Ov, and the leaf carbon/nitrogen content as well as C/N ratio increased significantly at B10N91, while bicarbonate and ammonium had no significant joint effects on the leaf carbon/nitrogen content in Ov, the leaf carbon /nitrogen content and C/N ratio did not change insignificantly at B10N19 in Ov.

Biomass

As shown in Table 2, the bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the roots, stems, leaves and total biomass in Bn and Ov, and they all increased significantly at B0N91. Compared to Bn, Ov had more significant total biomass. Bicarbonate and ammonium were not joint to affect the total biomass in either Bn or Ov, but the total biomass of B10N91 was higher than that of B0N19.

Table 2 Biomass of Bn and Ov under different bicarbonate and nitrogen in simulated karst habitat

Discussion

Joint interactions of bicarbonate and nitrate

Joint promotions on bicarbonate and nitrate in Bn and Ov

In this study, we found that nitrate enhanced the carbon and nitrogen metabolisms in both Ov and Bn. This is because nitrate promoted nitrate reduction and facilitated enzyme formation, then enhanced the Rubisco, SS, NR and GOGAT activities that promoted the carbon and nitrogen metabolisms in plants [25, 26].

The joint promotion of bicarbonate and nitrate in Bn and Ov was different, and the bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the photosynthesis, glucose metabolism and growth only in Ov. Bicarbonate provided protons for nitrate reduction, which promoted the formation of NADPH and RCRUBP, resulting in the enhancement of the photosynthesis and biomass in plants [27]. However, the promotion in Bn was offset by the adverse effect of bicarbonate [28, 29]. Compared to Bn, Ov was more capable of utilizing bicarbonate. On the one hand, it decreased the toxicity of bicarbonate [1]. On the other hand, the carbonic anhydrase of Ov was increased, resulting in more HCO3 catalyzed into H2O and CO2 to alleviate the stomatal closure and water use efficiency under karst drought, thus promoting the recovery of photosynthesis [1, 2]. Finally, the total glucose metabolism and biomass in Ov were promoted (Fig. 1).

Joint inhibitions on bicarbonate and nitrate in Bn and Ov

In this study, we found that the bicarbonate and nitrate joint only inhibited Tr of Ov. Compared to Bn, Ov was more capable of utilizing bicarbonate under karst drought [1, 2]. Dominated to CA, which excellently catalyzed HCO3 to CO2 and H2O [4, 5], thus increasing the water use efficiency, and reducing Tr in Ov (Fig. 1).

Joint interactions of bicarbonate and ammonium

Joint promotions on bicarbonate and ammonium in Bn and Ov

In this study, the bicarbonate and ammonium joint only promoted Ci in Bn and WUE in Ov. Compared to Ov, Bn had a greater demand for ammonium [30, 31], which made nitrogen accumulation increase dramatically, leading the photosynthesis enhance [32]. Therefore, the demand for CO2 and Ci increased in Bn. Meanwhile, Ov had lower demand for ammonium and therefore the nitrogen assimilation decreased, leading to the decrease of photosynthesis and leaf area [33]. Consequently, the transpiration decreased and the water use efficiency significantly enhanced in Ov.

Joint inhibitions on bicarbonate and ammonium in Bn and Ov

In this study, the bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited both the photosynthesis and the nitrogen metabolism in Ov. Previous studies have shown that bicarbonate can provide electrons to balance the cell potential imbalance caused by extra ammonium in the alkaline environment, thus reducing intracellular acidification [34, 35]. Therefore, the Bn enhanced its leaf biomass by using more ammonium, which significantly promoted Tr, resulting in the decrease of WUE in Bn. Compared to Bn, the Ov consumed a lower amount of ammonium, which decreased the nitrogen accumulation, resulting in the decline of the C and N metabolism enzymes, photosynthesis, NR., GOGAT, Pn and GC in Ov (Figs. 1 and 2).

Joint interactions of C and N in karst-adaptable plants

The Bn and Ov have different carbon/nitrogen coupling mechanisms under karst habitats (Tables 3 and 4), and the latter is more adaptable to high bicarbonate, high nitrate and high pH [1, 2, 5]. In this study, we found that the bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted the photosynthesis, glucose metabolism and water use efficiency in Ov, enabling it to adapt well to the drought, high bicarbonate, abundant nitrate and bare aluminium habitats. At the same time, the bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited the carbon/ nitrogen metabolism and growth of Ov, but promoted the water use efficiency, helping Ov alleviate the poison of ammonium to resistant the karst habitats (Fig. 6a). Additionally, in this study, bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium did not clearly joint affected the carbon/nitrogen metabolism in Bn (Fig. 6b), attributing to its weak karst adaptions. Hence, the C and N joint interactions are vital physiological mechanisms of karst adaptations in Ov.

Table 3 The carbon/nitrogen joint interactions in Bn and Ov under karst habitats
Table 4 Adaptive habitats of different metabolisms in Bn and Ov
Fig. 6
figure 6

The carbon and nitrogen joint effects in Bn and Ov under simulated karst habitats. ↑: joint promotion; −: no significant conjugation; ↓: joint inhibition; Ov: the yellow line indicates the joint interactions of bicarbonate and ammonium, and the blue line indicates the joint interactions of bicarbonate and ammonium; Bn: the red line indicates the joint interactions of bicarbonate and ammonium, and the purple line indicates the joint interactions of bicarbonate and nitrate

Conclusions

The bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonium jointly affected the carbon and nitrogen metabolisms, of which there were significant differences between a karst-adaptable plant (Ov) and a non-karst-adaptable plant (Bn). The Ov was more adaptable to karst habitats as bicarbonate and nitrate joint promoted photosynthesis and glucose metabolism in Ov, enhancing the carbon and nitrogen metabolism and growth, while they didn’t significantly affect the carbon and nitrogen metabolism in Bn. Bicarbonate and ammonium joint inhibited the photosynthesis and nitrogen metabolism in Ov. Also, they promoted water use efficiency, leading the growth to delay, and the ammonium toxicity alleviation, as well as the resistance to drought enhance, but the Bn was barely affected. In general, the joint interactions of carbon and nitrogen metabolisms in karst adaptable plants, such as Ov and others, are more sensitive to bicarbonate and nitrate/ammonia, which is essential for their adaptions to karst habitats. Furthermore, clarifying the joint interactions of various metabolisms, which dominated to the growth of plant species, also takes great contributions to the sustainable development of karst area.

Availability of data and materials

Data generated or analyzed during this study were included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Abbreviations

Bn:

Brassica napus

Ci:

Intercellular CO2 concentration

Cond:

Stomatal conductivity

EMP:

Glycolytic pathway

GC:

Growth capacity

G6PDH:

Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase

GOGAT:

Glutamate synthase

HCO3 :

Bicarbonate

NH4 + :

Ammonium

NO3 :

Nitrate

NR:

Nitrate reductase

Ov:

Orychophragmus violaceus

PFK:

Phosphofructokinase

Pn:

Photosynthetic rate

PPP:

Pentose phosphate pathway

RCRUBP :

The regeneration capacityof RUBP

Rubisco:

Ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase oxygenase

SS:

Sucrose synthetase

Tr:

Transpiration

WUE:

Water use efficiency

References

  1. Wu YY, Xing DK, Hang HT, et al. Principles technology of determination on plants' adaptation to karst environment. Beijing: Science Press of China; 2018. Chapter 1, pp17–50, ISBN 978–7–03-059386-3

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hang HT, Wu YY. Quantification of photosynthetic inorganic carbon utilisation via a bidirectional stable carbon isotope tracer. Acta Geochim. 2016;35:130–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhang KY, Wu YY, Hang HT. Differential contributions of nitrate/ammonium to nitrogen use in response to a variable inorganic nitrogen supply in plantlets of two Brassicaceae species in vitro. Plant Methods. 2019;15:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wu YY. Carbon sequestration strategy of suitable plants. Chin Karst. 2011;30:461–5.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wang R, Wu YY, Xing DK, et al. Physiological characteristics and inorganic carbon usage capacity of three biomass plants under simulative karst adversity (bicarbonate stress). Earth Environ. 2015;43:21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wu YY, Li HT, Xie TX, et al. Microalgae carbonic anhydrase biogeochemistry. Beijing: Science Press of China; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rao S, Wu YY. Root derived bicarbonate assimilation in response to variable water deficit in Camptotheca acuminate seedlings. Photosynth Res. 2017;134:59–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marcel S, Van DB, Jan S, et al. A comparative study of the use of inorganic carbon resources by Chara aspera and Potamogeton pectinatus. Aquat Bot. 2002;72:219–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mustroph A, Albrecht G. Tolerance of crop plants to oxygen deficiency stress: fermentative activity and photosynthetic capacity of entire seedlings under hypoxia and anoxia. Physiol Plant. 2003;117(4):508–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yao K, Wu YY. Rhizospheric bicarbonate improves glucose metabolism and stress tolerance of Broussonetia papyrifera L. seedlings under simulated drought stress. Russ J of. Plant Physiol. 2021;68:126–35.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Poothong S, Reed BM. Optimizing shoot culture media for Rubus germplasm: the effects of ammonium,nitrate. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant. 2016;52:265–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cui JH, Yu CQ, Qiao N, et al. Plant preference for ammonium versus nitrate at different growth stages in analpine agroecosystem. Field Crops Res. 2017;201:192–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bui TT, Carla L, Franziska E, et al. Ammonium and nitrate are both suitable inorganic nitrogen forms for the highly productive wetland grass Arundo donax, a candidate species for wetland paludiculture. Ecol Eng. 2017;105:379–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Feng YL. Nitrogen allocation and partitioning in invasive and native eupatorium species. Physiol Plant. 2008;132:350–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sylvain C, Jean FM, Lesaint C, et al. Nitrate or ammonium nutrition in French bean. Plant Soil. 1986;91:363–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Stitt M. Nitrate regulation of metabolism and growth. Curr Opin Plant Bio. 1999;2:178–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Brandner SJ. Plant nitrogen status rapidly alters amino acid metabolism and excretion in Bemisia tabaci. J Insect Physiol. 2002;48(1):33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Taylor NL, Day DA, Millar AH, et al. Targets of stress-induced oxidative damage in plant mitochondria and their impact on cell C/N ratio metabolism. J Exp Bot. 2004;394(55):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lu Y, Wu YY, Zhang KY. Does bicarbonate affect the nitrate utilisation and photosynthesis of Orychophragmus violaceus? Acta Geochim. 2018;37:875–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwender J, Ohlrogge JB, Shachar HY. A flux model of glycolysis and the oxidative pentosephosphate pathway in developing Brassica napus embryos. J Bio Chem. 2003;32(278):29442–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Amy DR, Patrick JM, Susan HB. Seasonally shifting limitation of stream periphyton: response of algal populations and assemblage biomass and productivity to variation in light, nutrients and herbivores. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 2000;57:66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Poluektov RA, Topazh AG. Calculation of the root/shoot ratio in the models of higher plant organogenesis. Russ J Plant Physiol. 2005;5(52):685–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Liu Z, Chen R, Xiao W. Effect of off-season flooding on growth, photosynthesis, carbohydrate partitioning, and nutrient uptake in distylium chinense. PLoS One. 2014;9(9):e107636.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Hitoshi S, Kyoko K, Atsushi D, et al. Partial characterisation of the signaling pathway for the nitrate dependent expression of genes for nitrogen assimilatory enzymes using detached maise leaves. Plant Cell Physio. 1997;38:837–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Putra DP, Berredjem A, Chalot M, et al. Growth characteristics, nitrogen uptake and enzyme activities of the nitrate-utilising ectomycorrhizal scleroderma verrucosum. Mycol Res. 1999;103(8):997–1002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hikosaka K, Shigeno A. The role of rubisco and cell walls in the interspecific variation in photosynthetic capacity. Oecologia. 2009;160:443–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gandois L, Perrin AS, Probst A. Impact of nitrogenous fertiliser-induced proton release on cultivated soils with contrasting carbonate contents: a column experiment. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2011;75(5):1185–98.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Rolf L, Travis D. Pleural fluid-plasma bicarbonate gradients in oxygen-toxic and normal rats. Am J Phys. 1973;224(4):857–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Yang YQ, Guo Y. Unraveling salt stress signaling in plants. J Integr Plant Biol. 2018;60(9):796–804.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mustapha A, Xavier S, Laëtitia J, et al. Hydroponics versus field lysimeter studies of urea, ammonium and nitrate uptake by oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). J Exp Bot. 2012;63(14):5245–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Balík J, Tlustoš P, Pavlíková D, et al. Sulphur and copper content in oilseed rape plants after the application of ammonium nitrate-sulphate. Eco Chem Eng. 2009;16:515–22.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Turpin DH, Elrifi IR, Birch DG, et al. Interactions between photosynthesis, respiration, and nitrogen assimilation in microalgae. Can J Bot. 1988;66(10):2083–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Valentine JF, Blythe EF, Madhavan S, et al. Effects of simulated herbivory on nitrogen enzyme levels, assimilation and allocation in Thalassia testudinum. Aqu.Bot. 2004;79(3):235–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hewitt NC, Grower JP, Umphres GD, et al. Ammonium treatments to suppress toxic blooms of prymnesium parvum in a subtropical lake of semi-arid climate: results from in situ mesocosm experiments. Water Res. 2013;47(13):4274–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Hachiya T, Inaba J, Wakazaki M, et al. Excessive assimilation of ammonium by plastidic glutamine synthetase is a major cause of ammonium toxicity in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat.Commun. 2021;12:4944.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We deeply appreciate Research Center for Environmental Bio-Science and Technology, State Key Laboratory of Environmental Geochemistry, Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences for supplying the experiment platform. Also, We are grateful to L.F. and L.L. (Research Center for Environmental Bio-Science and Technology, State Key Laboratory of Environmental Geochemistry, Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences) for their help with this work.

Funding

This study was supported by Support Plan Projects of Science and Technology of Guizhou Province [No. (2021) YB453] and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2021YFD1100300).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AT. X. and YY. W. designed research and conducted analyses. YY. W. conceived and funded the research. AT. X. wrote the manuscript, designed and conducted experiments and analyzed data. YY. W. directed the writing of this article. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanyou Wu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Table S1.

The original experimental data in this study.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xia, A., Wu, Y. Joint interactions of carbon and nitrogen metabolism dominated by bicarbonate and nitrogen in Orychophragmus violaceus and Brassica napus under simulated karst habitats. BMC Plant Biol 22, 264 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-022-03646-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-022-03646-1

Keywords

  • Bicarbonate
  • Carbon/nitrogen metabolism
  • Nitrogen source
  • Photosynthesis
  • Karst adaption