4.7 Article

Effects of photoinhibition on whole-plant carbon gain assessed with a photosynthesis model

Journal

PLANT CELL AND ENVIRONMENT
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 27-40

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00651.x

Keywords

Quercus coccifera; canopy structure; chlorophyll a fluorescence; F-v/F-m; leaf orientation; leaf area index (LAI); photoinhibition; photosynthetic light-response curve; model development; whole-plant photosynthesis model

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A canopy photosynthesis model was modified to assess the effect of photoinhibition on whole-plant carbon gain, Photoinhibitory changes in maximum quantum yield of photosystem II (F-v/F-m) could be explained solely from a parameter (Lflux) calculated from the light microenvironment of the leaves. This relationship between F-v/F-m and the intercepted cumulative light dose, integrated and equally weighted over several hours was incorporated into the model. The effect of photoinhibition on net photosynthesis was described through relationships between photoinhibition and the shaping parameters of the photosynthetic light-response curve (quantum use efficiency, convexity, and maximum capacity). This new aspect of the model was then validated by comparing measured field data (diurnal courses of F-v/F-m) with simulation results. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the extent of photoinhibitory reduction of whole-plant photosynthesis was strongly dependent on the structural parameters (LAI and leaf angle). Simulations for a Mediterranean evergreen oak, Quercus coccifera, under climatic conditions which cause mild photoinhibition revealed a daily loss of 7.5-8.5% of potential carbon gain in the upper sunlit canopy layers, a 3% loss in the bottom canopy, and an overall loss of 6.1%. Thus, this canopy photoinhibition model (CANO-PI) allows the quantitative evaluation of photoinhibition effects on primary production.

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