Literature DB >> 30426522

Red/blue light ratio strongly affects steady-state photosynthesis, but hardly affects photosynthetic induction in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum).

Yuqi Zhang1,2,3, Elias Kaiser3,4, Yating Zhang1,2, Qichang Yang1,2, Tao Li1,2.   

Abstract

Plants are often subjected to rapidly alternating light intensity and quality. While both short- and long-term changes in red and blue light affect leaf photosynthesis, their impact on dynamic photosynthesis is not well documented. It was tested how dynamic and steady-state photosynthetic traits were affected by red/blue ratios, either during growth or during measurements, in tomato leaves. Four red/blue ratios were used: monochromatic red (R100 ), monochromatic blue (B100 ), a red/blue light ratio of 9:1 (R90 B10 ) and a red/blue light ratio of 7:3 (R70 B30 ). R100 grown leaves showed decreased photosynthetic capacity (maximum rates of light-saturated photosynthesis, carboxylation, electron transport and triose phosphate use), leaf thickness and nitrogen concentrations. Acclimation to various red/blue ratios had limited effects on photosynthetic induction in dark-adapted leaves. B100 -grown leaves had a approximately 15% larger initial NPQ transient than the other treatments, which may be beneficial for photoprotection under fluctuating light. B100 -grown leaves also showed faster stomatal closure when exposed to low light intensity, which likely resulted from smaller stomata and higher stomatal density. When measured under different red/blue ratios, stomatal opening rate and photosynthetic induction rate were hardly accelerated by increased fractions of blue light in both growth chamber-grown leaves and greenhouse-grown leaves. However, steady-state photosynthesis rate 30 min after photosynthetic induction was strongly reduced in leaves exposed to B100 during the measurement. We conclude that varying red/blue light ratios during growth and measurement strongly affects steady-state photosynthesis, but has limited effects on photosynthetic induction rate.
© 2018 Scandinavian Plant Physiology Society.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30426522     DOI: 10.1111/ppl.12876

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Plant        ISSN: 0031-9317            Impact factor:   4.500


  5 in total

1.  A study on the proliferation of Myzus persicae (sulzer) during the winter season for year-round production within a smart farm facility.

Authors:  Jae-Hoon Park; Jung-Min Lee; Eui-Joo Kim; Ji-Won Park; Eung-Pill Lee; Soo-In Lee; Young-Han You
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-21       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  SlRBP1 promotes translational efficiency via SleIF4A2 to maintain chloroplast function in tomato.

Authors:  Liqun Ma; Yongfang Yang; Yuqiu Wang; Ke Cheng; Xiwen Zhou; Jinyan Li; Jingyu Zhang; Ran Li; Lingling Zhang; Keru Wang; Ni Zeng; Yanyan Gong; Danmeng Zhu; Zhiping Deng; Guiqin Qu; Benzhong Zhu; Daqi Fu; Yunbo Luo; Hongliang Zhu
Journal:  Plant Cell       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 12.085

3.  Adding Blue to Red Supplemental Light Increases Biomass and Yield of Greenhouse-Grown Tomatoes, but Only to an Optimum.

Authors:  Elias Kaiser; Theoharis Ouzounis; Habtamu Giday; Rachel Schipper; Ep Heuvelink; Leo F M Marcelis
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 5.753

4.  Spectral effect of streetlamps on urban trees: A simulated study on tissue water, nitrogen, and carbohydrate contents in maple and oak.

Authors:  Ping Liu; Baohui Cao; Yutao Wang; Zhongping Wei; Jingfeng Ye; Hongxu Wei
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Acclimating Cucumber Plants to Blue Supplemental Light Promotes Growth in Full Sunlight.

Authors:  Chenqian Kang; Yuqi Zhang; Ruifeng Cheng; Elias Kaiser; Qichang Yang; Tao Li
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 5.753

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.