, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 517–523 | Cite as

Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rainforest species

I. Induction under constant and fluctuating light conditions
  • Robin L. Chazdon
  • Robert W. Pearcy
Original Papers


Photosynthetic induction under constant and fluctuating light conditions was investigated in intact leaves of Alocasia macrorrhiza and Toona australis, two species native to Australian rainforests. When leaves were exposed to saturating light following a long period at low light intensity, an induction period of 25–40 min was required before steady-state photosynthesis was achieved. A long induction period was required regardless of plant growth conditions (high vs. low light) and ambient CO2 concentrations during mesurement. In low-light grown A. macrorrhiza, the initial slope of the relationship between assimilation and internal CO2 pressure increased 7-fold from 30 s following illumination to the end of the induction period. Both stomatal and carboxylation limitations play a role in photosynthetic induction, but carboxylation limitations predominate during the first 6–10 min. In both species, leaf induction state increased 2 to 3-fold during a sequence of five 30-or 60-s lightflecks separated by 2 min of low light. Rates of induction during 60-s lightflecks and during constant illumination were similar. Induction loss in low-light grown leaves of Alocasia macrorrhiza required more than 60 min of continuous exposure to low light conditions. These results suggest that, under forest understory conditions, leaves are at intermediate induction states for most of the day. The ability to utilize sunflecks may therefore be strongly influenced by the ability of leaves to maintain relatively high states of induction during long periods of low light.


Induction Period Induction State Intact Leaf Forest Understory Constant Illumination 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Björkman O, Ludlow MM (1972) Characterization of the light climate on the floor of a Queensland rainforest. Carnegie Inst Washtington Year Book 71:85–94Google Scholar
  2. Björkman O, Ludlow MM, Morrow PA (1972) Photosynthetic performance of two rainforest species in their native habitat and analysis of their gas exchange. Carnegie Inst Washington Year Book 71:94–102Google Scholar
  3. Chazdon RL (1986) Light variation and carbon gain in rain forest understory palms. J Ecology (in press)Google Scholar
  4. Chazdon RL, Fetcher N (1984) Photosynthetic light environments in a lowland tropical rain forest of Costa Rica. J Ecol 72:553–564Google Scholar
  5. Chazdon RL, Pearcy RW (1986) Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rainforest species. II. Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during lightflecks. Oecologia (Berlin) 69:524–531Google Scholar
  6. Edwards G, Walker D (1983) C3, C4: mechanisms and cellular and environmental regulation, of photosynthesis. Univ of Calif Press, Berkeley. p 542Google Scholar
  7. Farquhar GD, Sharkey TD (1982) Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 33:317–345Google Scholar
  8. Gross LJ (1982) Photosynthetic dynamics in varying light environments: a model and its application to whole leaf carbon gain Ecology 63:84–93Google Scholar
  9. Gross LJ, Chabot BF (1979) Time course of photosynthetic response to changes in incident light energy. Plant Physiol 63:1033–1038Google Scholar
  10. Korner CH, Scheel JA, Bauer H (1979) Maximum leaf diffusive conductance in vascular plants. Photosynthetica 13:45–82Google Scholar
  11. McAlister ED (1937) Time course of photosynthesis for a higher plant. Smithson Misc Coll 95:24Google Scholar
  12. Mott KA, Jensen RG, O'Leary JW, and Berry JA (1984) Photosynthesis and ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate concentrations in intact leaves of Xanthium strumarium L. Plant Physiol 76:968–971Google Scholar
  13. Osterhout WJV, Haas RC (1919) On the dynamics of photosynthesis. J. Gen Physiol 1:1–16Google Scholar
  14. Pearcy RW (1983) The light environment and growth of C3 and C4 tree species in the understory of a Hawaiian forest. Oecologia (Berlin) 58:19–25Google Scholar
  15. Pearcy RW, Calkin H (1983) Carbon dioxide exchange of C3 and C4 tree species in the understory of a Hawaiian forest. Oecologia (Berlin) 58:26–32Google Scholar
  16. Pearcy RF, Osteryoung K, Randall D (1982) Carbon dioxide exchange characteristics of C4 Hawaiian Euphorbia species native to diverse habitats. Oecologia (Berlin) 55:333–341Google Scholar
  17. 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
  18. Perchorowitz JT, Raynes DA, Jensen RG (1981) Light limitation of photosynthesis and activation of ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase in wheat seedlings. Proc Natl Acad Sci 78:2985–2989Google Scholar
  19. Rabinowitch EI (1956) Photosynthesis and related processes. Vol. II Part 2. Interscience publishers. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Schulze E-D, Hall AE (1982) Stomatal responses, water loss and CO2 assimilation rates of plants in contrasting environments. In: OL Lange, PS Nobel, CB Osmond, H Ziegler (eds) Physiological Plant Ecology II. vol. 12B. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, NS pp 181–230Google Scholar
  21. Sharkey TD (1985) Photosynthesis in intact leaves of C3 plants: physics, physiology and rate limitations. Botanical Review 51:54–105Google Scholar
  22. Von Caemmerer S, Farquhar GD (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange of leaves. Planta 153:376–387Google Scholar
  23. Walker DA (1981) Photosynthetic induction. In: Akoyonoglou G (ed) Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on Photosynthesis. Vol. IV Balaban Int. Sci. Series, Philadelphia pp 189–202Google Scholar
  24. Wong SC, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD (1979) Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282:424–426Google Scholar
  25. Woods DB, Turner NC (1971) Stomatal response to changing light by four species of varying shade tolerance. New Phytol 70:77–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robin L. Chazdon
    • 1
  • Robert W. Pearcy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BotanyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations