Electron transport, Photosystem-2 reaction centers and chlorophyll-protein complexes of thylakoids of drought resistant and sensitive Lupin piants.

Two genotypes ofLupinus albus L., resistant and susceptible to drought, were subjected to water deficiency for up to two weeks. Such treatment progressively lowered the leaf water content from about 85% to about 60% (water potential from -0.8 to -4.3 MPa). Light-saturation curves of the uncoupled electron transport were analyzed according to a simple kinetic model of separated or connected reversible photoreactions. It gives an extrapolated maximum rate (Vmax) and the efficiency for capturing light (Im, which is the light intensity at Vmax/2). For Photosystem 2, Vmax and, less markedly, Im, declined with increasing severity of drought treatment; the artificial donor, diphenylcarbazide, could not restore the activity. One cause of this Photosystem 2 inhibition could be the loss of active Photosystem 2 centers. Indeed, their concentration relative to chlorophyll, estimated by flash-induced reduction of dimethylquinone, was halved by a medium stress. To the extent that it was still not restored by diphenylcarbazide, the site of Photosystem 2 inactivation must have been close to the photochemical trap, after water oxidation and before or at plastoquinone pool. By relating electron transport rate to active centers instead of chlorophyll, no inhibition by drought was detected. Therefore, water stress inactivates specifically Photosystem 2, without impairing a downhill thermal step of electron transport. On the other hand, the decrease of Im suggests that antennae connected to inactive centers may transfer their excitation energy to active neighbors, which implies that antenna network remains essentially intact. Gel electrophoresis confirmed that the apoproteins of the pigment complexes were well conserved. In conclusion, the inactivation of Photosystem 2 may not be a physical loss of its centers and core antennae but probably reflects protein alterations or conformational changes. These may result from the massive decrease of lipids induced by drought (Meyer et al. 1992, Photosynth. Res. 32: 95-107). Both lupin genotypes behaved similarly but, for a same deficiency, the resistant seemed unexpectedly more sensitive to drought.