| Literature DB >> 27192998 |
A O Zhang1,2, Zhen-Hai Cui1,3, Jia-Lin Yu1, Zi-Ling Hu1, Rui Ding1,2, Da-Ming Ren4, Li-Jun Zhang5,6,7.
Abstract
Photooxidative damage to the needle leaves of evergreen trees results from the absorption of excess excitation energy. Efficient dissipation of this energy is essential to prevent photodamage. In this study, we determined the fluorescence transients, absorption spectra, chlorophyll contents, chlorophyll a/b ratios, and relative membrane permeabilities of needle leaves of Pinus koraiensis, Pinus tabulaeformis, and Pinus armandi in both cold winter and summer. We observed a dramatic decrease in the maximum fluorescence (F m) and substantial absorption of light energy in winter leaves of all three species. The F m decline was not correlated with a decrease in light absorption or with changes in chlorophyll content and chlorophyll a/b ratio. The results suggested that the winter leaves dissipated a large amount of excess energy as heat. Because the cold winter leaves had lost normal physiological function, the heat dissipation depended solely on changes in the photosystem II supercomplex rather than the xanthophyll cycle. These findings imply that more attention should be paid to heat dissipation via changes in the photosystem complex structure during the growing season.Entities:
Keywords: Absorption spectrum; Chlorophyll fluorescence; Photoinhibition; Photosystem complex; Pinus armandi; Pinus koraiensis; Pinus tabulaeformis; Xanthophyll cycle
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27192998 PMCID: PMC5127873 DOI: 10.1007/s00484-016-1182-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Biometeorol ISSN: 0020-7128 Impact factor: 3.787
Fig, 1The comparison of chlorophyll fluorescence transients of needles in Pinus trees between in cold winter and summer
The comparison of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of needles in Pinus trees between in cold winter and summer
| Species | Season | Fo | Fm | Fv | Fv/Fm |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Winter | 109 ± 19.85** | 136 ± 25.02** | 27 ± 10.30** | 0.20 ± 0.06** |
| Summer | 260 ± 27.83** | 1621 ± 203.44** | 1361 ± 180.10** | 0.84 ± 0.01** | |
|
| Winter | 135 ± 22.50** | 154 ± 17.78** | 18.67 ± 4.73** | 0.12 ± 0.05** |
| Summer | 200 ± 15.93** | 1209 ± 83.78** | 1009 ± 76.01** | 0.83 ± 0.01** | |
|
| Winter | 121 ± 3.06** | 147 ± 6.93** | 26.33 ± 4.16** | 0.17 ± 0.02** |
| Summer | 255 ± 27.91** | 1625 ± 213.53** | 1370 ± 215.53** | 0.84 ± 0.03** |
**Significance at P ≤ 0.01
Fig. 2The comparison of absorbance spectra of needles in Pinus trees between in cold winter and summer
Fig. 3The comparison of chlorophyll content and chlorophyll a/b ratio of needles in Pinus trees between in cold winter and summer. The error bar is SD. a, b significance at P ≤ 0.01, 0.05, respectively
Fig. 4The comparison of relative membrane permeability of needles in Pinus trees between in cold winter and summer. The error bar is SD. a significance at P ≤ 0.01