Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential
Abstract Plants release back to the atmosphere about half of the CO2 they capture by photosynthesis. Decreasing the rate of crop respiration could therefore potentially increase yields, store more carbon in the soil and draw down atmospheric CO2. However, decreasing respiration rate has had very lit...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley-VCH
2023-03-01
|
| Series: | Modern Agriculture |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/moda.1 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832575949136199680 |
|---|---|
| author | Jaya Joshi Jeffrey S. Amthor Donald R. McCarty Carlos D. Messina Mark A. Wilson A. Harvey Millar Andrew D. Hanson |
| author_facet | Jaya Joshi Jeffrey S. Amthor Donald R. McCarty Carlos D. Messina Mark A. Wilson A. Harvey Millar Andrew D. Hanson |
| author_sort | Jaya Joshi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Plants release back to the atmosphere about half of the CO2 they capture by photosynthesis. Decreasing the rate of crop respiration could therefore potentially increase yields, store more carbon in the soil and draw down atmospheric CO2. However, decreasing respiration rate has had very little research effort compared to increasing photosynthesis, the historically dominant metabolic paradigm for crop improvement. Conceptual and technical advances, particularly in protein turnover and directed enzyme evolution, have now opened ways to trim the large fraction of respiration that fuels proteome maintenance by lowering the breakdown and resynthesis rates of enzymes and other proteins. In addition to being theoretically possible and practicable, exploring the reduction of respiration is prudential, given that it (i) has barely yet been tried and (ii) could help meet the challenges of sustaining crop productivity and managing atmospheric carbon. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-fd961e3eb51148a99a71ce2a4d07cf10 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2751-4102 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-03-01 |
| publisher | Wiley-VCH |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Modern Agriculture |
| spelling | doaj-art-fd961e3eb51148a99a71ce2a4d07cf102025-01-31T16:15:25ZengWiley-VCHModern Agriculture2751-41022023-03-0111162610.1002/moda.1Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudentialJaya Joshi0Jeffrey S. Amthor1Donald R. McCarty2Carlos D. Messina3Mark A. Wilson4A. Harvey Millar5Andrew D. Hanson6Department of Biology Centre for Applied Synthetic Biology Concordia University Montréal Quebec CanadaNorthern Arizona University Center for Ecosystem Science and Society Flagstaff Arizona USAHorticultural Sciences Department University of Florida Gainesville Florida USAHorticultural Sciences Department University of Florida Gainesville Florida USADepartment of Biochemistry and Redox Biology Center University of Nebraska Lincoln Nebraska USAAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology School of Molecular Sciences University of Western Australia Crawley Western Australia AustraliaHorticultural Sciences Department University of Florida Gainesville Florida USAAbstract Plants release back to the atmosphere about half of the CO2 they capture by photosynthesis. Decreasing the rate of crop respiration could therefore potentially increase yields, store more carbon in the soil and draw down atmospheric CO2. However, decreasing respiration rate has had very little research effort compared to increasing photosynthesis, the historically dominant metabolic paradigm for crop improvement. Conceptual and technical advances, particularly in protein turnover and directed enzyme evolution, have now opened ways to trim the large fraction of respiration that fuels proteome maintenance by lowering the breakdown and resynthesis rates of enzymes and other proteins. In addition to being theoretically possible and practicable, exploring the reduction of respiration is prudential, given that it (i) has barely yet been tried and (ii) could help meet the challenges of sustaining crop productivity and managing atmospheric carbon.https://doi.org/10.1002/moda.1carbon capture and storagecrop respirationdirected evolutionprotein turnoveryield |
| spellingShingle | Jaya Joshi Jeffrey S. Amthor Donald R. McCarty Carlos D. Messina Mark A. Wilson A. Harvey Millar Andrew D. Hanson Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential Modern Agriculture carbon capture and storage crop respiration directed evolution protein turnover yield |
| title | Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential |
| title_full | Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential |
| title_fullStr | Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential |
| title_full_unstemmed | Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential |
| title_short | Why cutting respiratory CO2 loss from crops is possible, practicable, and prudential |
| title_sort | why cutting respiratory co2 loss from crops is possible practicable and prudential |
| topic | carbon capture and storage crop respiration directed evolution protein turnover yield |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/moda.1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jayajoshi whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT jeffreysamthor whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT donaldrmccarty whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT carlosdmessina whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT markawilson whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT aharveymillar whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential AT andrewdhanson whycuttingrespiratoryco2lossfromcropsispossiblepracticableandprudential |