4.6 Article

Short-term acclimation of the photosynthetic electron transfer chain to changing light: a mathematical model

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0223

关键词

photosynthesis; light acclimation; state transitions; non-photochemical quenching; Chlamydomonas reinhardtii; mathematical modelling

类别

资金

  1. SystemsX.ch RTD 'Plant Growth in a Changing Environment'
  2. Swiss National Foundation [31003A_146300, 3100A0_117712]
  3. EMBO
  4. Royal Society [IE110263]
  5. French National Foundation Agency (ANR) [phytadapt ANR-NT09_567009]
  6. Labex GRAL (Grenoble Alliance for Integrated Structural Cell Biology) grants
  7. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [31003A_146300] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Photosynthetic eukaryotes house two photosystems with distinct light absorption spectra. Natural fluctuations in light quality and quantity can lead to unbalanced or excess excitation, compromising photosynthetic efficiency and causing photodamage. Consequently, these organisms have acquired several distinct adaptive mechanisms, collectively referred to as non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) of chlorophyll fluorescence, which modulates the organization and function of the photosynthetic apparatus. The ability to monitor NPQ processes fluorometrically has led to substantial progress in elucidating the underlying molecular mechanisms. However, the relative contribution of distinct NPQ mechanisms to variable light conditions in different photosynthetic eukaryotes remains unclear. Here, we present a mathematical model of the dynamic regulation of eukaryotic photosynthesis using ordinary differential equations. We demonstrate that, for Chlamydomonas, our model recapitulates the basic fluorescence features of short-term light acclimation known as state transitions and discuss how the model can be iteratively refined by comparison with physiological experiments to further our understanding of light acclimation in different species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据