Ecological Research

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 413–423 | Cite as

Responses of the photosynthetic apparatus of Abies koreana to drought under different light conditions

Special Feature Climate Change and Biodiversity Conservation in East Asia as a token of memory for the 7th EAFES in Daegu, Korea


The threat of drought to trees is predicted to increase due to global warming. In a forest stand, the physiological responses of trees can differ depending on the light conditions. We analyzed photosynthetic rate, photopigment, and chlorophyll a fluorescence transient (OJIP test) of Abies koreana E.H. Wilson, under different light (full sunlight and 35 and 75% shading) and water conditions (well-watering, W; and no-watering, NW) to examine the combined effect of light and water. After 21 days of no-watering, we observed decreases in the photosynthetic rate and photopigment contents and quality, impairment of electron transfer from primary to secondary quinone acceptor, inactivation of reaction center, and lower photosynthetic performance index, especially under full sunlight. The time required for recovery after re-watering was also slower under full sunlight. In conclusion, the adverse effects of drought on light absorption and utility of A. koreana in the photosynthetic process were much greater under high light intensity compared to shading conditions, which alleviated these effects.


Abies koreana Chlorophyll a fluorescence Climate change Drought Shade 



This study was supported by research grants from the National Institute of Forest Science (Project FE0100-2017-03).


  1. Albert KR, Mikkelsen TN, Michelsen A, Ro-Poulsen H, van der Linden L (2011) Interactive effects of drought, elevated CO2 and warming on photosynthetic capacity and photosystem performance in temperate heath plants. J Plant Physiol 168(13):1550–1561CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen CD, Macalady AK, Chenchouni H, Bachelet D, McDowell N, Vennetier M, Kitzberger T, Rigling A, Breshears DD, Hogg ET (2010) A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For Ecol Manag 259:660–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alves PLCA, Magalhães CAN (2002) The phenomenon of photoinhibition of photosynthesis and its importance in reforestation. Bot Rev 68(2):193–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asada K (1999) The water-water cycle in chloroplasts: scavenging of active oxygens and dissipation of excess photons. Annu Rev Plant Biol 50:601–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asada K (2006) Production and scavenging of reactive oxygen species in chloroplasts and their functions. Plant Physiol 141:391–396CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Barsi DC, Major JE, Mosseler A, Campbell M (2009) Genetic variation and control of chloroplast pigment concentrations and related needle-level traits in Picea rubens, Picea mariana, and their hybrids: moisture and light environmental effects. Trees 23:555–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bjorkman O (1981) Response to different quantum flux densities. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H (eds) Physiological plant ecology I. Response to the physical environment, encyclopedia of plant physiology, new series, 12A. Springer, Berlin, pp 57–107Google Scholar
  8. Brzostek ER, Dragoni D, Schmid HP, Rahman AF, Sims D, Wayson CA, Johnson DJ, Phillips RP (2014) Chronic water stress reduces tree growth and the carbon sink of deciduous hardwood forests. Glob Change Biol 20:2531–2539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bussotti F, Strasser RJ, Schaub M (2007) Photosynthetic behavior of woody species under high ozone exposure probed with the JIP-test: a review. Environ Pollut 147:430–437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cailleret M, Nourtier M, Amm A, Durand-Gillmann M, Davi H (2014) Drought-induced decline and mortality of silver fir differ among three sites in Southern France. Ann For Sci 71:643–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ceppi MG, Oukarroum A, Çiçek N, Strasser RJ, Schansker G (2012) The IP amplitude of the fluorescence rise OJIP is sensitive to changes in the photosystem I content of leaves: a study on plants exposed to magnesium and sulfate deficiencies, drought stress and salt stress. Physiol Plant 144:277–288CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Fini A, Ferrini F, Ferdinando MD, Brunetti C, Giordano C, Gerini F, Tattini M (2014) Acclimation to partial shading or full sunlight determines the performance of container-grown Fraxinus ornus to subsequent drought stress. Urban For Urban Green 13(1):63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flexas J, Medrano H (2002) Drought-inhibition of photosynthesis in C3 plants: stomatal and non-stomatal limitations revisited. Ann Bot 89:183–189CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Flexas J, Ribas-Carbó M, Bota J, Galmés J, Henkle M, Martínez-Cañellas S, Medrano H (2006) Decreased Rubisco activity during water stress is not induced by decreased relative water content but related to conditions of low stomatal conductance and chloroplast CO2 concentration. New Phytol 172:73–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Flexas J, Barón M, Bota J, Ducruet J-M, Gallé A, Galmés J, Jiménez M, Pou A, Ribas-Carbó M, Sajnani C, Tomás M, Medrano H (2009) Photosynthesis limitation during water stress acclimation and recovery in the drought-adapted Vitis hybrid Richter-110 (V berlandieri × V rupestris). J Exp Bot 66(8):2361–2377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foyer CH, Shigeoka S (2011) Understanding oxidative stress and antioxidant functions to enhance photosynthesis. Plant Physiol 155:93–100. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallé A, Haldimann P, Feller U (2007) Photosynthetic performance and water relations in young pubescent oak (Quercus pubescens) trees during drought stress and recovery. New Phytol 174:799–810CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. IPCC (2013) The Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) climatic change: the physical science basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeGoogle Scholar
  19. Jahns P, Holzwarth AR (2012) The role of the xanthophyll cycle and of lutein in photoprotection of photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1817:182–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jiménez MD, Pardos M, Puértolas J, Kleczkowski LA, Pardos JA (2009) Deep shade alters the acclimation response to moderate water stress in Quercus Suber L. Forestry 82(3):285–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim Y-S, Chang C-S, Kim C-S, Gardner M (2011) The IUCN red list of threatened species 2011: e.T31244A9618913. 18 January 2017Google Scholar
  22. Knapp AK, Hoover DL, Wilcox KR, Avolio ML, Koerner SE, La Pierre KJ, Loik ME, Luo Y, Sala OE, Smith MD (2015) Characterizing differences in precipitation regimes of extreme wet and dry years: implications for climate change experiments. Glob Change Biol 21:2624–2633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kwon MY, Woo SY (2016) Plants’ responses to drought and shade environments. Afr J Biotechnol 15:29–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee B, Nam G, Yun J, Cho GY, Lee JS, Kim J, Park TS, Kim K, Oh K (2010) Biological indicators to monitor responses against climate change in Korea. Korean J Plant Taxon 40:202–207Google Scholar
  25. Lepeduš H, Begović L, MlinarIć S, Šimić D, Štolfa I, Parađiković N, Užarević Z, Jurković V, Cesar V (2011) Physiology and biochemistry of leaf bleaching in prematurely aging maple (Acer saccharinum L.) trees. II. Functional and molecular adjustment of PSII. Acta Bot Croat 70:133–146Google Scholar
  26. Li L, Zhou Z, Liang J, Lv R (2015) In vivo evaluation of the high-irradiance effects on PSII activity in photosynthetic stems of Hexinia polydichotoma. Photosynthetica 53:621–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lichtenthaler HK, Ač A, Marek MK, Kalina J, Urban O (2007) Differences in pigment composition, photosynthetic rates and chlorophyll fluorescence images of sun and shade leaves of four tree species. Plant Physiol Biochem 45:577–588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Lim J, Woo S, Kwon M, Kim Y (2007) Antioxidant enzyme activities and soil properties of healthy and declining Abies koreana (Wils.) in Mt. Halla. J Korean For Soc 96(1):14–20Google Scholar
  29. Matsubara S, Chow WS (2004) Populations of photoinactivated photosystem II reaction centers characterized by chlorophyll a fluorescence lifetime in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:18234–18239CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Medrano H, Escalona JM, Bota J, Gulías J, Flexas J (2002) Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought: stomatal conductance as a reference parameter. Ann Bot 89(7):895–905CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Murchie EH, Horton P (1997) Acclimation of photosynthesis to irradiance and spectral quality in British plant species: chlorophyll content, photosynthetic capacity and habitat preference. Plant Cell Environ 20:438–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nobel SP (2009) Photochemistry of photosynthesis—other photosynthetic pigments. Physicochemical and environmental plant physiology, 4th edn. Academic Press, Oxford, pp 238–244Google Scholar
  33. Oguchi R, Terashima I, Kou J, Chow WS (2011) Operation of dual mechanisms that both lead to photoinactivation of Photosystem II in leaves by visible light. Physiol Plant 142:47–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Oukarroum A, El Madidi S, Schansker G, Strasser RJ (2007) Probing the responses of barley cultivars (Hordeum vulgare L.) by chlorophyll a fluorescence OLKJIP under drought stress and re-watering. Environ Exp Bot 60:438–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pearcy RW, Sims DA (1994) Photosynthetic acclimation to changing light environments: scaling from the leaf to the whole plant. In: Caldwell MM, Pearcy RW (eds) Exploitation of environmental heterogeneity by plants: ecophysiological processes above and below ground. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 145–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Powles SB (1984) Photoinhibition of photosynthesis induced by visible light. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 35:15–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rathod D, Brestic M, Shao H (2011) Chlorophyll a fluorescence determines the drought resistance capabilities in two varieties of mycorrhized and non-mycorrhized Glycine max Linn. African J Microbiol Res 5:4197–4206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rodriguez-Dominguez CM, Buckley TN, Egea G, Cires A, Hernandez-Santana V, Martorell S, Diaz-Espejo A (2016) Most stomatal closure in woody species under moderate drought can be explained by stomatal responses to leaf turgor. Plant Cell Environ 39:2014–2026CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Sancho-Knapik D, Peguero-Pina JJ, Flexas J, Herbette S, Cochard H, Niinemets Ü, Gil-Pelegrín E (2014) Coping with low light under high atmospheric dryness: shade acclimation in a Mediterranean conifer (Abies pinsapo Boiss.). Tree Physiol 34:1321–1333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Santabarbara S, Bordignon E, Jennings RC, Carbonera D (2002) Chlorophyll triplet states associated with photosystem II of thylakoids. Biochemistry 41(25):8184–8194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sarijeva G, Knapp M, Lichtenthaler HK (2007) Differences in photosynthetic activity, chlorophyll and carotenoid levels, and in chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in green sun and shade leaves of Ginkgo and Fagus. J Plant Physiol 164:950–955CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Schansker G, Tóth SZ, Strasser RJ (2005) Methylviologen and dibromothymoquinone treatments of pea leaves reveal the role of photosystem I in the Chl a fluorescence rise OJIP. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1706:250–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schrader JA, Graves WR, Rice SA, Gibson JP (2006) Difference in shade tolerance help explain varying success of two synpatric Alnus L. species. Int J Plant Sci 5:979–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shao R, Wang K, Shangguan Z (2010) Cytokinin-induced photosynthetic adaptability of Zea mays L. to drought stress associated with nitric oxide signal: probed by ESR spectroscopy and fast OJIP fluorescence rise. J Plant Physiol 167:472–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith JM, Paritsis J, Veblen TT, Chapman TB (2015) Permanent forest plots show accelerating tree mortality in subalpine forests of the Colorado Front Range from 1982 to 2013. For Ecol Manag 341:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stirbet A (2011) On the relation between the Kautsky effect (chlorophyll a fluorescence induction) and Photosystem II: Basics and applications of the OJIP fluorescence transient. J Photochem Photobiol B 104:236–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Strasser RJ, Tsimilli-Michael M, Srivastava A (2004) Analysis of the chlorophyll a fluorescence transient. In: Papageorgiou GC, Govindjee (eds) Chlorophyll a fluorescence. Advances in photosynthesis and respiration, vol 19. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 321–362Google Scholar
  48. Terashima I, Handa YT, Tholen D, Niinemets Ű (2011) Leaf functional anatomy in relation to photosynthesis. Plant Physiol 155(1):108–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Valladares F, Niinemets U (2006) Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:237–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Valladares F, Wright SJ, Lasso E, Kitajima K, Pearcy RW (2000) Plastic phenotypic response to light of 16 congeneric shrubs from a Panamanian rainforest. Ecology 81:1925–1936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Valladares F, Laanisto L, Niinemets Ü, Zavala MA (2016) Shedding light on shade: ecological perspectives of understorey plant life. Plant Ecol Diver 9:237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. van Rensburg L, Krüger GH, Eggenberg P, Strasser RJ (1996) Can screening criteria for drought resistance in Nicotiana tabacum L. be derived from the polyphasic rise of the chlorophyll a fluorescence transient (OJIP)? S Afr J Bot 62(6):337–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vass I, Cser K (2009) Janus-faced charge recombinations in photosystem II photoinhibition. Trends Plant Sci 14(4):200–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Vogelmann TC, Gorton HL (2014) Leaf: light capture in the photosynthetic organ. The structural basis of biological energy generation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 363–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. von Caemmerer S, Farquhar G (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange of leaves. Planta 153:376–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wagner A, McGraw JB (2013) Sunfleck effects on physiology, growth, and local demography of American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.). Forest Ecol Manag 291:220–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang Z, Chen L, Ai J, Qin H, Liu Y, Xu P, Jiao Z, Zhao Y, Zhang Q (2012) Photosynthesis and activity of photosystem II in response to drought stress in Amur Grape (Vitis amurensis Rupr.). Photosynthetica 50:189–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wellburn AR, Lichtenthaler H (1984) Formulae and program to determine total carotenoids and chlorophylls a and b of leaf extracts in different solvents. In: Sybesma C (ed) Advances in photosynthesis research. Advances in agricultural biotechnology, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 9–12Google Scholar
  59. Woo SY, Lim J, Lee DK (2008) Effects of temperature on photosynthetic rates in Korean fir (Abies koreana) between healthy and dieback population. J Integr Plant Biol 50:190–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Wyka T, Robakowski P, Żytowiak R (2008) Leaf age as a factor in anatomical and physiological acclimative responses of Taxus baccata L. needles to contrasting irradiance environments. Photosynth Res 95:87–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Xu Z, Zhou G, Shimizu H (2010) Plant responses to drought and rewatering. Plant Signal Behav 5:649–654CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Yamazaki JY, Suzuki T, Maruta E, Kamimura Y (2005) The stoichiometry and antenna size of the two photosystems in marine green algae, Bryopsis maxima L. and Ulva pertusa L., in relation to the light environment of their natural habitat. J Exp Bot 416:1517–1523CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Ecological Society of Japan 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest ConservationNational Institute of Forest ScienceSeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Division of Environmental Horticulture, Department of Natural ScienceUniversity of KoreaSeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations