Applications of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Photosynthesis Research, Stress Physiology, Hydrobiology and Remote Sensing 1988
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-2823-7_4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Photosystem II Heterogeneity in Chloroplasts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1990
1990
1996
1996

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…So, it was found important to complete the analysis of the PS II function by additional, independent measurements, namely the kinetics of chlorophyll fluorescence changes during a dark-light transition (Kautsky effect), the fluorescence decay after a single turnover flash and the effect of an electron donor to PS II (hydroxylamine). Table 1 shows the main features of the Kautsky-type induction curves of chlorophyll fluorescence (O-I-P phase) measured in darkadapted potato leaves suddenly illuminated with moderate white light, whereas the rapid O-I fluorescence rise has been attributed to QA reduction in the Qa-non-reducing PS II reaction centers (Melis et al 1988), the second phase (I-P) reflects accumulation of QA in 'active' centers with efficient electron transfer to plastoquinone, with the lag (t) in the transition from I to P corresponding to the time needed for electrons to accumulate in the plastoquinone pool (Malkin 1971). Photoinhibitory light stress reduced P and increased t, indicating lower efficiency of PS II to produce electrons (as more time is necessary to reduce the plastoquinone pool).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So, it was found important to complete the analysis of the PS II function by additional, independent measurements, namely the kinetics of chlorophyll fluorescence changes during a dark-light transition (Kautsky effect), the fluorescence decay after a single turnover flash and the effect of an electron donor to PS II (hydroxylamine). Table 1 shows the main features of the Kautsky-type induction curves of chlorophyll fluorescence (O-I-P phase) measured in darkadapted potato leaves suddenly illuminated with moderate white light, whereas the rapid O-I fluorescence rise has been attributed to QA reduction in the Qa-non-reducing PS II reaction centers (Melis et al 1988), the second phase (I-P) reflects accumulation of QA in 'active' centers with efficient electron transfer to plastoquinone, with the lag (t) in the transition from I to P corresponding to the time needed for electrons to accumulate in the plastoquinone pool (Malkin 1971). Photoinhibitory light stress reduced P and increased t, indicating lower efficiency of PS II to produce electrons (as more time is necessary to reduce the plastoquinone pool).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is not the case with the increase in the relative concentration of PSII, centers, which were detected in the absence of light. These centers, which have a smaller antenna size and are located in the nonappressed thylakoid regions (Melis et al, 1988), have been suggested to be a reserve pool of PSII to replace photoinhibited PSII centers (Melis, 1985;Tyystjarvi and Aro, 1990). However, the p centers created by heat treatment are unlikely to have such a role; rather, they are formed by the disconnection of LHCII from PSII (Sundby et al, 1986).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But the existence of QB-non-reducing PS II units in leaves of various plants has been established (Chylla andWhitmarsh 1989, Ort andWhitmarsh 1990). According to Melis et al (1988, cf. Melis 1985, in spinach thylakoids the population of such units is identical with the PS-II/3 fraction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For calculation of the photochemical yield, dpp, we assume for reasons of simplicity that all/3 units are of 'QB-non-reducing type' (see Melis et al 1988) and do not contribute to linear electron transport. Therefore, the rate constant k e in this case is ascribed only to the fraction ce • (1 -D'):…”
Section: Outline Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%