| Literature DB >> 21382918 |
Xinyou Yin1, Zhouping Sun, Paul C Struik, Junfei Gu.
Abstract
Day respiration (R(d)) is an important parameter in leaf ecophysiology. It is difficult to measure directly and is indirectly estimated from gas exchange (GE) measurements of the net photosynthetic rate (A), commonly using the Laisk method or the Kok method. Recently a new method was proposed to estimate R(d) indirectly from combined GE and chlorophyll fluorescence (CF) measurements across a range of low irradiances. Here this method is tested for estimating R(d) in five C(3) and one C(4) crop species. Values estimated by this new method agreed with those by the Laisk method for the C(3) species. The Laisk method, however, is only valid for C(3) species and requires measurements at very low CO(2) levels. In contrast, the new method can be applied to both C(3) and C(4) plants and at any CO(2) level. The R(d) estimates by the new method were consistently somewhat higher than those by the Kok method, because using CF data corrects for errors due to any non-linearity between A and irradiance of the used data range. Like the Kok and Laisk methods, the new method is based on the assumption that R(d) varies little with light intensity, which is still subject to debate. Theoretically, the new method, like the Kok method, works best for non-photorespiratory conditions. As CF information is required, data for the new method are usually collected using a small leaf chamber, whereas the Kok and Laisk methods use only GE data, allowing the use of a larger chamber to reduce the noise-to-signal ratio of GE measurements.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21382918 PMCID: PMC3130174 DOI: 10.1093/jxb/err038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Bot ISSN: 0022-0957 Impact factor: 6.992
Fig. 1.Net CO2 assimilation rate (A) as a function of intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci). Numbers indicate the three incident irradiances (Iinc) under which measurements were carried out (in μmol m−2 s−1). Regression lines at these Iinc, fitted to data points that each represents the mean of measurements from four replicated plants, were forced to join at the common intersection point (Ci*, –Rd), where Rd is the estimated leaf respiration rate in the light (Laisk method) and Ci* is the Ci-based CO2 compensation point in the absence of Rd. The dashed horizontal line is the line of A=0. The estimated Rd is negative for maize (b), indicating that the Laisk method does not work for C4 species. Note that the scales in the two panels are different.
Fig. 2.Net CO2 assimilation rate (A) as a function of limiting incident irradiances (Iinc) at ambient air CO2 with 21% (filled circles) and 2% (open circles) O2 levels. Each data point represents the mean of measurements from four replicated plants. Solid and dotted lines represent regressions for data within the linear range from irradiance levels higher than the Kok break point at 21% and 2% O2, respectively. The extrapolation of these regression lines to the zero light level gives an estimation of -Rd, where Rd is the estimated respiration rate in the light (Kok method). The regression lines below the break point are not shown.
Fig. 3.Net CO2 assimilation rate (A) as a function of the variable IincΦ2/4 (where Iinc is the incident irradiance and Φ2 is the quantum efficiency of PSII electron transport) at ambient air CO2 with 21% (filled circles) and 2% (open circles) O2 levels. Each data point represents the mean of measurements from four replicated plants. Solid and dotted lines represent regressions for data within the linear range from irradiance levels higher than the break point at 21% and 2% O2, respectively. The extrapolation of these regression lines to the zero IincΦ2/4 level gives an estimation of -Rd, where Rd is the estimated respiration rate in the light (new CF method). The regression lines below the break point are not shown.
Fig. 4.Quantum efficiency of PSII electron transport (as indicated by chlorophyll fluorescence data for the apparent PSII quantum efficiency ΔF/F'm) as a function of incident irradiance Iinc at ambient air CO2 with 21% (filled circles) and 2% (open circles) O2 levels for rice, potato, and maize. Each data point represents the mean of measurements from four replicated plants.
Value of the day respiration Rd (SE of the estimate in parentheses) estimated by three methods (i.e. Laisk, Kok, and CF), the intercept value at the A-axis by extrapolating the linear relationship below the break point (see Figs 2 and 3), and the mean value of the respiration rate in darkness Rdk across four replications (SE of the mean in parentheses), for leaves in six crop species
| Crop | O2 (%) | Intercept at | ||||||
| Laisk | Kok | CF | Kok | CF | ||||
| C3 | Wheat | 21 | 0.972 (0.516) | 0.631 (0.151) | 1.043 (0.140) | 1.436 (0.129) | 1.474 (0.142) | 1.358 (0.048) |
| Rice | 21 | 0.628 (0.511) | 0.368 (0.146) | 0.522 (0.172) | 0.903 (0.218) | 0.901 (0.218) | 0.806 (0.122) | |
| 2 | – | 0.369 (0.155) | 0.744 (0.149) | 0.984 (0.327) | 1.015 (0.336) | 0.608 (0.120) | ||
| Potato | 21 | 1.522 (0.612) | 1.563 (0.209) | 1.751 (0.229) | 2.725 (0.218) | 2.735 (0.220) | 2.468 (0.150) | |
| 2 | – | 2.555 (0.105) | 2.890 (0.123) | 2.327 (0.384) | 2.339 (0.389) | 2.250 (0.263) | ||
| Tomato | 21 | 1.310 (0.729) | 0.962 (0.081) | 1.024 (0.084) | 1.790 (0.198) | 1.793 (0.201) | 1.675 (0.150) | |
| Rose | 21 | 1.320 (0.976) | 1.286 (0.069) | 1.503 (0.096) | 1.929 (0.340) | 1.938 (0.343) | 1.930 (0.188) | |
| C4 | Maize | 21 | NA | 1.614 (0.126) | 1.911 (0.084) | 2.213 (0.212) | 2.234 (0.209) | 2.473 (0.398) |
| 2 | NA | 1.740 (0.169) | 1.985 (0.133) | 2.417 (0.415) | 2.441 (0.418) | 2.325 (0.368) | ||
Data were from the first set of measurements. The unit of all parameters is μmol m−2 s−1.
NA, not applicable, as the Laisk method does not work for C4 species (see text); –, not measured, as the Laisk method is usually applied under the ambient O2 conditions.
Fig. 5.Values of leaf respiration rate in the light (Rd) for five C3 species at 21% O2, estimated by the Kok method (open circles) or by the new CF method (filled circles), compared with the estimates for Rd by the Laisk method. The dashed line represents the 1:1 relationship.
Fig. 6.Net CO2 assimilation rate (A) of wheat leaves as a function of the variable IincΦ2/4 (where Iinc is the incident irradiance and Φ2 is the quantum efficiency of PSII electron transport) at ambient air CO2 with 21% (a) and 2% (b) O2 levels. Each data point represents the mean of measurements from four replicated plants. Solid and dotted lines represent regressions for data within the linear range from irradiance levels higher than the break point for increasing (filled circles) and decreasing (open circles) light series, respectively. The dotted regression line is invisible in (b) because it virtually overlaps with the solid line. The extrapolation of these regression lines to the zero IincΦ2/4 level gives an estimation of -Rd, where Rd is the estimated leaf respiration rate in the light (new CF method). The regression lines below the break point are not shown.
Value of the day respiration Rd (SE of the estimate in parentheses) estimated by the CF method, and the mean value of the respiration rate in darkness Rdk across four replications (SE of the mean in parentheses), for leaves in three crop species
| Crop | O2 (%) | |||||
| Increasing | Decreasing | Pooled | ||||
| C3 | Wheat | 21 | 1.054 (0.113)a | 0.820 (0.112)a | 0.936 (0.083) | 1.782 (0.173) |
| 2 | 0.687 (0.093)a | 0.502 (0.093)a | 0.594 (0.068) | 1.076 (0.055) | ||
| Rice | 21 | 0.628 (0.190)a | 0.734 (0.188)a | 0.681 (0.130) | 0.975 (0.161) | |
| 2 | 0.552 (0.136)a | 0.402 (0.136)a | 0.477 (0.095) | 0.644 (0.061) | ||
| C4 | Maize | 21 | 2.629 (0.263)a | 2.086 (0.270)a | 2.365 (0.199) | 2.094 (0.273) |
| 2 | 1.284 (0.226)a | 1.928 (0.260)a | 1.562 (0.192) | 1.794 (0.202) | ||
Data were from the second set of measurements, where irradiances were changed in either increasing or decreasing order. The unit of Rd and Rdk is μmol m−2 s−1.
The same letter in a row means that the estimated Rd did not differ significantly (P >0.10) between increasing and decreasing irradiance series.
Evaluation of the three methods to estimate leaf respiration rate in the light Rd
| Advantages | Disadvantages | |
| The Laisk method | 1. Data used could be obtained from a large (e.g. 6 cm2) leaf chamber. | 1. Low |
| 2. The method provides additional estimates on carboxylation efficiencies at various irradiances and on the very useful parameter | 2. It is required to correct for the CO2 leakage during the gas exchange measurement. | |
| 3. The method could be used to check roughly if | 3. The method is applicable only for C3, not for C4 plants. | |
| 4. The method is sensitive to errors of the system in measuring transpiration that affects | ||
| The Kok method | 1. Data used could be obtained from a large (e.g. 6 cm2) leaf chamber. | 1. The method is based on the assumption that Φ2 is constant within used irradiances, which is highly unlikely; as a result, it may underestimate |
| 2. The method is applicable for both C3 and C4 plants. | 2. Low irradiance levels have to be used, which may not represent the light level for normal plant growth | |
| 3. The method could potentially be applied to the CO2 levels for normal plant growth; so it is possible that no correction for CO2 leakage during measurement is required. | 3. Theoretically, the method works best for the non-photorespiratory condition. | |
| 4. The method provides additional estimate for ΦCO2. | ||
| 5. The method is insensitive to errors in measuring transpiration. | ||
| 6. The method could be used to check if | ||
| The new CF method | 1. Using CF information, the method corrects for the error of the Kok method assuming a constant Φ2 with low irradiances; as a result, data of a wider range of irradiance could be useable, relative to the Kok method. | 1. Data used have to be obtained from a small (e.g. 2 cm2) leaf chamber because errors with CF measurements are inversely proportional to leaf area (but note that this limitation does not apply for fluorescence systems based on area-imaging cameras). |
| 2. The method is applicable for both C3 and C4 plants. | 2. Generally low irradiance levels are used, which may not represent the light level for normal plant growth. | |
| 3. The method could potentially be applied to the CO2 levels for normal plant growth; so it is possible that no correction for CO2 leakage during measurement is required. | 3. Theoretically, the method works best for the non-photorespiratory condition. | |
| 4. The method provides additional estimate for parameter | ||
| 5. The method is insensitive to errors in measuring transpiration. | ||
| 6. The method could be used to check if |