4.7 Article

Timely estimation of leaf chlorophyll fluorescence parameters under varying light regimes by coupling light drivers to leaf traits

期刊

PHYSIOLOGIA PLANTARUM
卷 175, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ppl.14048

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The relationship between chlorophyll a fluorescence (ChlF) parameters and leaf morphological/biochemical traits varies under different light conditions. Light drivers have a better predictive ability for light dependent ChlF parameters compared to leaf traits. Furthermore, the responses of ChlF parameters to light drivers differ between leaf types.
Unveiling informative chlorophyll a fluorescence (ChlF) parameters and leaf morphological/biochemical traits under varying light conditions is important in ecological studies but has less been investigated. In this study, the trait-ChlF relationship and regressive estimation of ChlF parameters from leaf traits under varying light conditions were investigated using a dataset of synchronous measurements of ChlF parameters and leaf morphological/biochemical traits in Mangifera indica L. The results showed that the relationships between ChlF parameters and leaf traits varied across light intensities, as indicated by different slopes and intercepts, highlighting the limitations of using leaf traits alone to capture the dynamics of ChlF parameters. Light drivers, on the other hand, showed a better predictive ability for light dependent ChlF parameters compared to leaf traits, with light intensity having a large effect on light-dependent ChlF parameters. Furthermore, the responses of OF and NPQ to light drivers differed between leaf types, with light intensity having an effect on Phi F in shaded leaves, whereas it had a primary effect on NPQ in sunlit leaves. These results facilitate and deepen our understanding of how the light environment affects leaf structure and function and, therefore, provide the theoretical basis for understanding plant ecological strategies in response to the light environment.

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

4.7
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