An action spectrum for the low-fluencerate response of chloroplast movement in protonemata of the fern Adiantum capillus-veneris L. was determined using polarized light vibrating perpendicularly to the protonema axis. The spectrum had several peaks in the blue region around 450 nm and one in the red region at 680 nm, the blue peaks being higher than the red one. The red-light action was suppressed by nonpolarized far-red light given simultaneously or alternately, whereas the bluelight action was not. Chloroplast movement was also induced by a local irradiation with a narrow beam of monochromatic light. A beam of blue light at low energy fluence rates (7.3·10(-3)-1.0 W m(-2)) caused movement of the chloroplasts to the beam area (positive response), while one at high fluence rates (10 W m(-2) and higher) caused movement to outside of the beam area (negative response). A red beam caused a positive response at fluence rates up to 100 W m(-2), but a negative response at very high fluence rates (230 and 470 W m(-2)). When a far-red beam was combined with total background irradiation with red light at fluence rates causing a low-fluence-rate response in whole cells, chloroplasts moved out of the beam area. When blue light was used as background irradiation, however, a narrow far-red beam had no effect on chloroplast distribution. These results indicate that the light-oriented movement of Adiantum chloroplasts is caused by red and blue light, mediated by phytochrome and another, unidentified photoreceptor(s), respectively. This movement depends on a local gradient of the far-red-absorbing form of phytochrome or of a photoexcited blue-light photoreceptor, and it includes positive and negative responses for both red and blue light.

An action spectrum for anthocyanin formation in dark-grown broom sorghum (Sorghum bicolor Moench, cv Acme Broomcorn and cv Sekishokuzairai Fukuyama Broomcorn) seedlings was determined over the wavelength range from 260 to 735 nanometers. The action peaks were at 290, 650, 385, and 480 nanometers in descending order of height. The action of the 290-nanometer peak was not affected by subsequently given far red light, whereas those of the other three action peaks were nullified completely. The nullification of the 385-nanometer peak action by far red light was reversible. When an irradiation at these action peaks was followed by a phytochrome-saturating fluence of red light irradiation, the action of the 290-nanometer peak remained, whereas that of the 385-nanometer peak as well as those of the 650-and 480-nanometer peaks was masked by the action of the second irradiation. These findings suggested that the 290-and 385-nanometer action peaks involved different photoreceptors, the latter being phytochrome. The blue light-absorbing photoreceptor as reported to be a prerequisite for phytochrome action in milo sorghum was not found to exist in the broom sorghums.The action spectrum deprived of the involvement of phytochrome was determined in the ultraviolet region by irradiating with far red light following monochromatic ultraviolet light. The spectrum had a single intense peak at 290 nanometers and no action at all at wavelengths longer than 350 nanometers.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract— Using 290‐nm light, which excites only a UV‐B photoreceptor, and 385‐ and 660‐nm light, which activate only phytochrome, the fluence rate‐response curves of monochromatic irradiations for anthocyanin synthesis in the first internodes of broom sorghum (Sorghum bicolor Moench, cv. Acme Broomcorn) were analyzed. Although the two photoreceptors absorbed light independently, they multiplicatively increased the action of each other. Accordingly, when the fluence rates of both wavelengths were changed together, the resulting slopes of the fluence rate‐response curves of double‐log plots were steep compared with the slopes obtained with the respective monochromatic irradiations. The slopes of fluence rate‐response curves for monochromatic irradiations at 325 to 345 nm were steeper than those at other wavelengths. This difference was shown to be due to the multiplicative actions of both photoreceptors.

No abstract

No abstract