4.5 Article

INORGANIC CARBON ACQUISITION BY CHRYSOPHYTES

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYCOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages 1052-1061

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2009.00734.x

Keywords

carbon dioxide; carbon-concentrating mechanisms; freshwater algae; pH-drift; photosynthesis; pyrenoids

Funding

  1. Freshwater Biological Association
  2. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010022] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Twelve species, representing 12 families of the chrysophytes sensu lato, were tested for their ability to take up inorganic carbon. Using the pH-drift technique, CO2 compensation points generally varied between 1 and 20 mu mol . L-1 with a mean concentration of 5 mu mol . L-1. Neither pH nor alkalinity affected the CO2 compensation point. The concentration of oxygen had a relatively minor effect on CO2-uptake kinetics, and the mean CO2 compensation point calculated from the kinetic curves was 3.6 mu mol . L-1 at 10-15 kPa starting oxygen partial pressure and 3.8 mu mol . L-1 at atmospheric starting oxygen partial pressure (21 kPa). Similarly, uptake kinetics were not affected by alkalinity, and hence concentration of bicarbonate. Membrane inlet mass spectrometry (MIMS) in the presence and absence of acetazolamide suggested that external carbonic anhydrase in Dinobryon sertularia Ehrenb. and Synura petersenii Korschikov was either very low or absent. Rates of net HCO3- uptake were very low (similar to 5% of oxygen evolution) using MIMS and decreased rather than increased with increasing HCO3- concentration, suggesting that it was not a real uptake. The CO2 compensation points determined by MIMS for CO2 uptake and oxygen evolution were similar to those determined in pH-drift and were >1 mu mol . L-1. Overall, the results suggest that chrysophytes as a group lack a carbon-concentrating mechanism (CCM), or an ability to make use of bicarbonate as an alternative source of inorganic carbon. The possible evolutionary and ecological consequences of this are briefly discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available