4.7 Article

Efficiency of the oxygenic photosynthesis on Earth-like planets in the habitable zone

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 505, Issue 3, Pages 3329-3335

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab1357

Keywords

astrobiology; stars: low-mass

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluates the possibility of oxygenic photosynthesis on planets around stars based on their spectral type and planet-star separation, finding that exergy increases with star effective temperature and biospheres on exoplanets around cool stars may be light-limited. Terrestrial planets comparable to Earth in terms of useful photon flux, exergy, and exergetic efficiency have not yet been observed.
Oxygenic photosynthesis is the most important biochemical process in Earth biosphere and likely very common on other habitable terrestrial planets, given the general availability of its input chemical ingredients and of light as source of energy. It is therefore important to evaluate the effective possibility of oxygenic photosynthesis on planets around stars as a function of their spectral type and the planet-star separation. We aim at estimating the photon flux, the exergy, and the exergetic efficiency of the radiation in the wavelength range useful for the oxygenic photosynthesis as a function of the host star effective temperature and planet-star separation. We compute analytically these quantities and compare our results with the estimates for the small sample of known Earth-like planets. We find that exergy is an increasing function of the star effective temperature, within the range 2600-7200K. It depends both on the star-planet separation and the star effective temperature. Biospheres on exoplanets around cool stars might be generally light-limited. So far, we have not observed terrestrial planets comparable to Earth in terms of useful photon flux, exergy, and exergetic efficiency.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available