, 26:1255 | Cite as

Interactive effects of light and salinity stress on the growth, reproduction, and photosynthetic capabilities ofVallisneria americana (wild celery)

  • Gail T. French
  • Kenneth A. MooreEmail author


The effects of light and salinity onVallisneria americana (wild celery) were studied in outdoor mesocosms for an entire growing season. Morphology, production, photosynthesis, and reproductive output were monitored from sprouting of winter buds to plant senescence and subsequent winter bud formation under four salinity (0, 5, 10, and 15 psu) and three light (2%, 8%, and 28% of surface irradiance) regines. Chlorophylla fluorescence was used to examine photochemical efficiency and relative electron transport rate. High salinity and low light each stunted plant growth and reproduction. Production (biomass, rosette production, and leaf area index) was affected more by salinity than by light, apparently because of morphological plasticity (increased leaf length and width), increased photosynthetic efficiency, and increased chlorophyll concentrations under low light. Relative maximum electron transport rate (ETRmax) was highest in the 28% light treatment, indicating increased photosynthetic capacity. ETRmax was not related to salinity, suggesting that the detrimental effects of salinity on production were through decreased photochemical efficiency and not decreased photosynthetic capacity. Light and salinity effects were interactive for measures of production, with negative salinity effects most apparent under high light conditions, and light effects found primarily at low salinity levels. For most production and morphology parameters, high light ameliorated salinity stress to a limited degree, but only between the 0 and 5 psu regimes. Growth was generally minimal in all of the 10 and 15 psu treatments, regardless of light level. Growth was also greatly reduced at 2% and 8% light. Flowering and winter bud production were impaired at 10 and 15 psu and at 2% and 8% light. Light requirements at 5 psu may be approximately 50% higher than at 0 psu. Because of the interaction between salinity and light requirements for growth, effective management of SAV requires that growth requirements incorporate the effects of combined stressors.


Salinity Stress Leaf Area Index Dissolve Inorganic Nitrogen Light Treatment Submerged Aquatic Vegetation 
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.

Literature Cited

  1. Asch, F., M. Dingkuhn, andK. Dorffling. 2000. Salinity increases CO2 assimilation but reduces growth in field-grown, irrigated rice.Plant and Soil 218:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barko, J. W., D. G. Hardin, andM. S. Matthews. 1982. Growth and morphology of submersed freshwater macrophytes in relation to light and temperature.Canadian Journal of Botany 60: 877–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barko, J. W. andR. M. Smart. 1981. Comparative influences of light and temperature on the growth and metabolism of selected submersed freshwater macrophytes.Ecological Monographs 51:219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barko, J. W., R. M. Smart, andD. G. McFarland. 1991. Interactive effects of environmental conditions on the growth of submersed aquatic macrophytes.Journal of Freshwater Ecology 6: 199–207.Google Scholar
  5. Batiuk, R. A., P. Bergstrom, M. Kemp, E. Koch, L. Murray, J. C. Stevenson, R. Bartleson, V. Carter, N. B. Rybicki, C. Gallegos, L. Karrh, M. Naylor, D. Wilcox, K. Moore, S. Ailstock, andM. Teichberg. 2000. Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation water quality and habitat-based requirements and restoration targets: A second technical synthesis. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, Maryland.Google Scholar
  6. Batiuk, R. A., R. J. Orth, K. A. Moore, W. C. Dennison, J. C. Stevenson, L. Staver, V. Carter, N. Rybicki, R. E. Hickman, S. Kollar, S. Bieber, P. Heasly, andP. Bergstrom. 1992. Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation habitat requirements and restoration targets: A technical synthesis. CBP/TRS 83/92. U.S. Environmental Protection. Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, Maryland.Google Scholar
  7. Bayley, S., V. D. Stotts, P. F. Springer, andJ. Steenis. 1978. Changes in submerged aquatic macrophyte populations at the head of the Chesapeake Bay, 1958–1974.Estuaries 1:171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beer, S. andM. Bjork. 2000. Measuring rates of photosynthesis of two tropical seagrasses by pulse amplitude modulated (PAM) fluorometry.Aquatic Botany 66:69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beer, S. andM. Ilan. 1998. In situ measurements of photosynthetic irradiance responses of two Red Sea sponges growing under dim light conditions.Marine Biology 131:613–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beer, S., M. Ilan, A. Eshel, A. Weil, andI. Brickner. 1998. Use of pulse amplitude modulated (PAM) fluorometry for in situ measurements of photosynthesis in two Red Sea faviid corals.Marine Biology 131:607–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beer, S., C. Larsson, O. Poryan, andL. Axelsson. 2000. Photosynthetic rates ofUlva (Chlorophyta) meaaured by pulse amplitude modulated (PAM) fluorometry.European Journal of Phycology 35:69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blanch, S. J., G. G. Ganf, andK. F. Walker. 1998. Growth and recruitment inWallisneria Americana as related to average irradiance in the water column.Aquatic Botany 61:181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bourn, W. S. 1932. Ecological and physiological studies on certain aquatic angiosperms.Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute 4:425–496.Google Scholar
  14. Bourn, W. S. 1934. Sea-water tolerance ofVallisneria spiralis L. andPotamogeton foliosus Raf.Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute 6:303–308.Google Scholar
  15. Carter, V., N. B. Rybicki, J. M. Landwehr, andM. Naylor. 2000. Light requirements for SAV survival and growth, p. 11–33.In Chesapeake Bay SAV Water Quality and Habitat-based Requirements and Restoration Targets: A Second Technical Synthesis. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, Maryland.Google Scholar
  16. Carter, V., N. B. Rybicki, andM. Turtora. 1996. Effect of increasing photon irradiance on the growth ofVallisneria americana in the tidal Potomac River.Aquatic Botany 54:337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Champ, M. A., G. A. Gould, III,W. E. Bozzo, S. G. Ackleson, andK.C. Vierra. 1980. Characterization of light extinction and attenuation in Chesapeake Bay, August 1977, p. 263–277.In V. S. Kennedy (ed.), Estuarine Perspectives. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Davis, G. J. and M. M. Brinson. 1976. The submersed macrophytes of the Pamlico River estuary, North Carolina. University of North Carolina, Water Resources Research Institute Report No. 112. Raleigh, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  19. Dennison, W. C. 1990. Chlorophyll content, p. 83–86.In R. C. Phillips and C. P. McRoy (eds.), Seagrass Research Methods. UNESCO, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  20. Doering, P. H., R. H. Chamberlain, andJ. M. McMunigal. 2001. Effects of simulated saltwater intrusions on the growth and survival of wild celery,Vallisneria americana, from the Caloosahatchee estuary (South Florida).Estuaries 24:894–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dring, M. J. 1986. The Biology of Marine Plants. Edward Arnold, London, U.K.Google Scholar
  22. Dunton, K. H. 1996. Photosynthetic production and biomass of the subtropical seagrassHalodule wrightii along an estuarine gradient.Estuaries 19:436–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodman, J. L., K. A. Moore, andW. C. Dennison. 1995. Photosynthetic reponses of eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) to light and sediment sulfide in a shallow barrier island lagoon.Aquatic Botany 50:37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hale, M. G. andD. M. Orcutt. 1987. The Physiology of Plants Under Stress. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  25. Haller, W. T., D. L. Sutton, andW. C. Barlowe. 1974. Effects of salinity on growth of several aquatic macrophytes.Ecology 55:891–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haramis, G. M. andV. Carter. 1983. Distribution of submersed aquatic macrophytes in the tidal Potomac River.Aquatic Botany 15:65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Havaux, M. 1992. Stress tolerance of photosystem II in vivo.Plant Physiology 100:424–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hopkinson, Jr.,C. S., A. E. Giblin, J. Tucker, andR. H. Garritt. 1999. Benthic metabolism and nutrient cycling along an estuarine salinity gradient.Estuaries 22:863–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kamermans, P., M. A. Hemminga, andD. J. Jong. 1999. Significance of salinity and silicon levels for growth of a formerly estuarine eelgrass (Zostera marina) population (Lake Grevelingen, The Netherlands)Marine Biology 133:527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kemp, W. M., R. R. Twilley, J. C. Stevenson, W. R. Boynton, andJ. C. Means. 1983. The decline of submerged vascular plants in upper Chesapeake Bay: Summary of results concerning possible causes.Marine Technology Society Journal 17: 78–89.Google Scholar
  31. Kerr, E. A. andS. Strother. 1985. Effects of irradiance, temperature and salinity on photosynthesis ofZostera muelleri.Aquatic Botany 23:177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kimber, A., C. E. Korschgen, andA. G. Van Der Valk. 1995. The distribution ofVallisneria americana seeds and seedling light requirements in the Upper Mississippi River.Canadian Journal of Botany 73:1966–1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kirk J. T. O. 1994. Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
  34. Koch, E. W. 2001. Beyond light: Physical, geological and geochemical parameters as possible submersed aquatic vegetation habitat requirements.Estuaries 24:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Koroleva, O. Y., W. Bruggemann, andG. H. Krause. 1994. Photoinhibition, xanthophyll cycle and in vivo chlorophyll fluorescence quenching of chilling-tolerantOxyria digyna and chilling sensitiveZea mays.Physiologia Plantarum 92:577–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Korschgen, C. E. andW. L. Green. 1989. American wild celery (Vallisneria americana): Ecological considerations for restoration work. Fish and Wildlife technical report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  37. Korschgen, C. E., W. L. Green, andK. P. Kenow. 1997. Effects of irradiance on growth and winter bud production byVallisneria americana and consequences to its abundance and distribution.Aquatic Botany 58:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kraemer, G. P., R. H. Chamberlain, P. H. Doering, A. D. Steinman, andM. D. Hanisak. 1999. Physiological responses of transplants of the freshwater angiospermVallisneria americana along a salinity gradient in the Caloosahatchee estuary (southwestern Florida).Estuaries 22:138–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kromkamp, J., C. Barranguet, andJ. Peene. 1998. Determination of micophytobenthos PSII quantum efficiency and photosynthetic activity by means of variable chlorophyll fluorescence.Marine Ecology Progress Series 162:45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lazar, A. C. andC. J. Dawes. 1991. A seasonal study of the seagrassRuppia maritima L. in Tampa Bay, Florida. Organic constituents and tolerances to salinity and temperature.Botanica Marina 34:265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lowden, R. M. 1982. An approach to the taxonomy ofVallisneria L. (Hydrocharitaceae).Aquatic Botany 13:269–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Masini, R. J., J. L. Cary, C. J. Simpson, andA. J. McComb. 1995. Effects of light and temperature on the photosynthesis of temperate meadow-forming seagrasses in Western Australia.Aquatic Botany 49:239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Masini, R. J. andC. R. Manning. 1997. The photosynthetic responses to irradiance and temperature of four meadow-forming seagrasses.Aquatic Botany 58:21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maxwell, K. andG. N. Johnson. 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence—A practical guide.Journal of Exprimental Botany 51: 659–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Meyer, B. S., F. H. Bell, L. C. Thompson, andE. I. Clay. 1943. Effect of depth of immersion on apparent photosynthesis in submersed vascular aquatics.Ecology 24:393–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moore, K. A., H. A. Neckles, andR. J. Orth. 1996.Zostera marina (eelgrass) growth and survival along a gradient of nutrients and turbidity in the lower Chesapeake Bay.Marine Ecology Progress Series 142:247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore, K. A., R. L. Wetzel, andR. J. Orth. 1997. Seasonal pulses of turbidity and their relations to eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) survival in an estuary.Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 215:115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moore, K. A., D. J. Wilcox, andR. J. Orth 2000. Analysis of abundance of submersed aquatic vegetation communities in the Chesapeake Bay.Estuaries 23:115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morlock, S., D. Taylor, A. Giblin, C. Hopkinson, andJ. Tucker. 1997. Effect of salinity on the fate of inorganic nitrogen in sediments of the Parker River estuary, Massachusetts.Biological Bulletin 193:290–292.Google Scholar
  50. Orth, R. J. andK. A. Moore. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: An unprecedented decline in submerged aquatic vegetation.Science 222:51–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Orth, R. J. andK. A. Moore. 1984. Distribution and abundance of submerged aquatic vegetation in Chesapeake Bay: A historical perspective.Estuaries 7:531–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Parsons, T. R., Y. Maita, andC. M. Lalli. 1984. A Manual of Chemical and Biological Methods for Seawater Analysis. Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
  53. Perez, M. andJ. Romero. 1992. Photosynthetic response to light and temperature of the seagrassCymodocea nodosa and the prediction of its seasonality.Aquatic Botany 43:51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ralph, P. J. 1998. Photosynthetic response ofHalophila ovalis (R. Br.) Hook. f. to osmotic stress.Journal of Experimental and Marine Biology and Ecology 227:203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ralph, P. J. 1999a. Photosynthetic response ofHalophila ovalis (R. Br.) Hook. f. to combined environmental stress.Aquatic Botany 65:83–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ralph, P. J. 1990b. Light-induced photoinhibitory stress responses of laboratory-culturedHalophila ovalis.Botanica Marina 42:11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ralph, P. J. andM. D. Burchett. 1995. Photosynthetic responses of the seagrassHalophila ovalis (R. Br.) Hook. f. to high irradiance stress, using chlorophylla fluorescence.Aquatic Botany 51:55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ralph, P. J. andM. D. Burchett. 1998. Impact of petrochemicals on the photosynthesis ofHalophila ovalis using chlorophyll fluorescence.Marine Pollution Bulletin 36:429–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Romero-Aranda, R., T. Soria, andJ. Cuartero. 2001. Tomato plant-water uptake and plant-water relationships under saline growth conditions.Plant Science 160:265–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rout, N. P. andB. P. Shaw. 2001. Salt tolerance in aquatic macrophytes: Possible involvement of the antioxidative enzymes.Plant Science 160:415–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schreiber, U., W. Bilger, andC. Neubauer. 1994. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a nonintrusive indicator for rapid assessment of in vivo photosynthesis.Ecological Studies: Analysis and Synthesis 100:49–70.Google Scholar
  62. Spencer, D. F., G. G. Ksander J. D. Madsen, andC. S. Owens. 2000. Emergence of vegetative propagules ofPotamogeton nodosus, Potamogeton pectinatus, Vallisneria americana, andHydrilla verticillata based on accumulated degree-days.Aquatic Botamy 67:237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Staver, L. W. 1986. Competitive interactions of submersed aquatic vegetation under varying nutrient and salinity conditions. Master's Thesis. University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland.Google Scholar
  64. Steindler, L., S. Beer, A. Peretzman-Shemer, C. Nyberg, andM. Ilan. 2001. Photoadaptation of zooxanthellae in the spongeCliona vastifica from the Red Sea, as measured in situ.Marine Biology 138:511–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stevenson, J. C., L. W. Staver, andK. W. Staver. 1993. Water quality associated with survival of submersed aquatic vegetation along an estuarine gradient.Estuaries 16:346–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stross, R. G. 1979. Density and boundary regulations of theNitella meadow in Lake George, New York.Aquatic Botany 6: 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Titus, J. E. andM. S. Adams. 1979. Coexistence and the comparative light relations of the submersed macrophytesMyriophyllum spicatum L. andVallisneria americana Michx.Oecologia 40:273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Twilley, R. R. andJ. W. Barko. 1990. The growth of submersed macrophytes under experimental salinity and light conditions.Estuaries 13:311–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Manual of methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA-600-4-79-020. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.Google Scholar
  70. Van Dijk, G. M. 1991. Survival of aPotamogeton pectinatus L. population under various light conditions in a shallow euthrophic lake (Lake Veluwe) in the Netherlands.Aquatic Botany 39:121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wang, D., M. C. Shannon, andC. M. Grieve. 2001. Salinity reduces radiation absorption and use efficiency in soybean.Field Crops Research 69:267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. White, A. J. andC. Critchley. 1999. Rapid light curves: A new fluorescence method to assess the state of the photosynthetic apparatus.Photosynthesis Research 59:63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Estuarine Research Federation 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Virginia Institute of Marine ScienceGloucester Point

Personalised recommendations