Reply to ‘Measurement of nitrogenase activity in legume root nodules: In defense of the acetylene reduction assay’ by J.K. Vessey

This article is in response to that of Vessey (1994) who argues that the traditional, closed acetylene reduction assay can still be a valuable tool for measuring relative differences in nitrogenase activity of legumes. To counter this assertion we consider the practical uses of the traditional assay procedure in relation to real research situations. This requires the use of the assay to be considered separately in the different circumstances of pot-grown and field-grown plants. We conclude that for pot-grown legumes there are a few practical applications where the use of the traditional, closed assay procedure is valid and we accept that these can be extended by the careful use of calibrations against open, flow-through systems. However, we doubt that there are many situations where such a calibration approach would have practical advantages over using the flow-through system to obtain the actual measurements. We cannot recommend any form of the uncalibrated acetylene reduction assay for field-based studies and suggest that researchers consider the merits of simple, alternative measurements such as dry weight, yield and total nitrogen.