| Abstract: | Nitrate reduction in leaves of tomato occurred at the same ratein plants grown in 8.0 mol m–3 nitrate as in plants grownin 2.0 mol m–3 nitrate, but at a much slower rate in plantsgrown in 0.1 mol m–3 nitrate. However, the plants grownin 8.0 mol m–3 nitrate had a larger leaf system than theplants grown in 2.0 mol m–3 nitrate, and so the totalcapacity to assimilate nitrate was greater in the plants grownin the higher concentration. It was shown that plants grownin 8.0 mol m–3 nitrate were better buffered against nitratewithdrawal than plants grown in 2.0 mol m–3 nitrate asthe rate of nitrate reduction declined more slowly when plantswere transferred to 0.1 mol m–3 nitrate from the higherconcentration than from the lower concentration. Furthermore,leaf expansion continued in the plants transferred from thehigher concentration, whereas it ceased abruptly in the plantstransferred from the lower concentration. It was concluded thatboth continuing expansion and continuing nitrate reduction wereaccompanied, and possibly caused by, a release of nitrate fromstorage pools in the lower part of the stem or the roots. Duringwithdrawal of nitrate the leaves were shown to maintain potentialactivity of the enzyme nitrate reductase although there wasno nitrate to be reduced. When nitrate was resupplied it couldbe reduced very quickly and reduction in the leaves was seento increase within 5 h of resupply. By 3 d after resupply furtherenzyme activity had been induced. Key words: Lycopersicon esculentum Mill, nitrate assimilation, nitrate reductase activity, nitrate withdrawal |
