Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 100, Issue 4, pp 463–469 | Cite as

Characteristics of transient photosynthesis in Quercus serrata seedlings grown under lightfleck and constant light regimes

  • Tang Yanhong
  • Koizumi Hiroshi
  • Satoh Mitsumasa
  • Washitani Izumi
Original Paper

Abstract

Photosynthetic-induction response and light-fleck utilization were investigated for the current-year seedlings of Quercus serrata, a deciduous tree found in temperate regions of Japan. The tree seedlings were grown under three light regimes: a constant low photosynthetic photon flux density (PFD) regime of 50 μmol m−2 s−1, a constant high PFD regime of 500 μmol m−2 s−1, and a lightfleck regime with alternated low (lasting 5 s) and high (lasting 35 s) PFD. The photosynthetic-induction response following a sudden increase of PFD from 50 to 500 μmol m−2 s−1 exhibited two phases: an initial fast increase complete within 3–5 s, and a second slow increase lasting for 15–20 min. Induction times required to reach 50% and 90% of steady-state assimilation rates were significantly shorter in leaves from the constant low PFD than those from the high PFD regime. During the first 60–100 s, the ratio of observed integrated CO2 uptake to that predicted by assuming that a steady-state assimilation would be achieved instantaneously after the light increase was significantly higher for leaves from the low PFD regime than from the high PFD regime. Lightfleck utilization was examined for various durations of PFD of 500 μmol m−2 s−1 on a background PFD of 50 μmol m−2 s−1. Lightfleck utilization efficiency was significantly higher in low PFD leaves than in the high PFD leaves for 5-s and 10-s lightflecks, but showed no difference among different light regimes for 100-s lightflecks. The contribution of post-illumination CO2 fixation to total carbon gain decreased markedly with increasing lightfleck durations, but exhibited no significant difference among growth regimes. Photosynthetic performances of induction response and lightfleck utilization in leaves from the lightfleck regime were more similar to those in leaves from the low PFD regime. It may be the total daily PFD rather than PFD dynamics in light regimes that affects the characteristics of transient photosynthesis in Q. serrata seedlings.

Key words

Carbon gain Induction Lightflecks Photosynthesis Temperate plant 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Caemmerer S von, Farquhar GD (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange of leaves. Planta 153: 376–387Google Scholar
  2. Chabot BF, Jurik TW, Chabot JF (1979) Influence of instantaneous and integrated light-flux density on leaf anatomy and photosynthesis. Am J Bot 66: 940–945Google Scholar
  3. Chazdon RL, Pearcy RW (1986a) Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rain forest species. I. Induction under constant and fluctuating light conditions. Oecologia 69: 517–523Google Scholar
  4. Chazdon RL, Pearcy RW (1986b) Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rain forest species. II. Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during lightflecks. Oecologia 69: 524–531Google Scholar
  5. Kirschbaum MUF, Pearcy RW (1988a) Gas exchange analysis of the relative importance of stomatal and biochemical factors in photosynthetic induction in Alocasia macrorhiza. Plant Physiol 86: 782–785Google Scholar
  6. Kirschbaum MUF, Pearcy RW (1988b) Gas exchange analysis of the fast phase of photosynthetic induction in Alocasia macrorrhiza. Plant Physiol 87: 818–821Google Scholar
  7. Küppers M, Schneider H (1993) Leaf gas exchange of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) seedlings in lightflecks: effects of fleck length and leaf temperature in leaves grown in deep and partial shade. Trees 7: 160–168Google Scholar
  8. Pearcy RW (1988) Photosynthetic utilisation of lightflecks by understory plants. Aust J Plant Physiol 15: 223–238Google Scholar
  9. Pearcy RW (1990) Sunflecks and photosynthesis in plant canopies. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 41: 421–453Google Scholar
  10. Pearcy RW, Seemann JR (1990) Photosynthetic induction state of leaves in a soybean canopy in relation to light regulation of ribulose-1-5-bisphosphate carboxylase and stomatal conductance. Plant Physiol 94: 628–633Google Scholar
  11. Pearcy RW, Osteryoung K, Calkin HW (1985) Photosynthetic responses to dynamic light environments by Hawaiian trees. The time course of CO2 uptake and carbon gain during sunflecks. Plant Physiol 79: 896–902Google Scholar
  12. Pfitsch WA, Pearcy RW (1989) Daily carbon gain by Adenocaulon bicolor, a redwood forest understory herb, in relation to its light environment. Oecologia 80: 465–470Google Scholar
  13. Pons TL, Pearcy RW (1992) Photosynthesis in flashing light in soybean leaves grown in different conditions. II. Lightfleck utilization efficiency. Plant Cell Environ 15: 577–584Google Scholar
  14. Sharkey TD, Seemann JR, Pearcy RW (1986) Contribution of metabolites of photosynthesis to postillumination CO2 assimilation in response to lightflecks. Plant Physiol 82: 1063–1068Google Scholar
  15. Sim DA, Pearcy RW (1993) Sunfleck frequency and duration affects growth rate of the understorey plant, Alocasia macrorrhiza. Funct Ecol 7: 683–689Google Scholar
  16. Tang Y, Washitani I, Tsuchiya T, Iwaki H (1988) Fluctuation of photosynthetic photon flux density within a Miscanthus sinensis canopy. Ecol Res 3: 253–266Google Scholar
  17. Tang Y, Washitani I, Tsuchiya T, Iwaki H (1990) Growth analysis of Quercus serrata seedlings within Miscanthus sinensis grass canopies differing in light availability. Ecol Res 5: 367–376Google Scholar
  18. Tang Y, Washitani I, Iwaki H (1992a) Seasonal variation of microsite light availability within a Miscanthus sinensis canopy. Ecol Res 7: 97–106Google Scholar
  19. Tang Y, Washitani I, Iwaki H (1992b) Effects of microsite light availability on the survival and growth of oak seedlings within a grassland. Bot Mag 105: 281–288Google Scholar
  20. Tang Y, Koizumi H, Washitani I, Iwaki H (1993) A preliminary study on the photosynthetic induction response of Quercus serrata seedlings. J Plant Res 106: 219–222Google Scholar
  21. Tinoco-Ojanguren C, Pearcy RW (1992) Dynamic stomatal behavior and its role in carbon gain during lightflecks of a gap phase and an understory Piper species acclimated to high and low light. Oecologia 92: 222–228Google Scholar
  22. Tinoco-Ojanguren C, Pearcy RW (1993) Stomatal dynamics and its importance to carbon gain in two rainforests Piper species: II. Stomatal versus biochemical limitations during photosynthetic induction. Oecologia 94: 395–407Google Scholar
  23. Woodrow IE, Mott KA (1989) Rate limitation of non-steady-state photosynthesis by ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase in spinach. Aust J Plant Physiol 16: 487–500Google Scholar
  24. Woods DB, Turner NC (1971) Stomatal responses to changing light by four tree species of varying shade tolerance. New Phytol 70: 77–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tang Yanhong
    • 1
  • Koizumi Hiroshi
    • 1
  • Satoh Mitsumasa
    • 1
  • Washitani Izumi
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Plant EcologyNational Institute of Agro-Environmental SciencesTsukuba, IbarakiJapan
  2. 2.Institute of Biological SciencesUniversity of TsukubaTsukuba, IbarakiJapan

Personalised recommendations