4.6 Article

Characterization of the water oxidizing complex of photosystem II of the Chl d-containing cyanobacterium Acaryochloris marina via its reactivity towards endogenous electron donors and acceptors

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 8, 期 29, 页码 3460-3466

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b604389e

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acaroychloris (A.) marina is a unique oxygen evolving organism that contains a large amount of chlorophyll d (Chl d) and only very few Chl a molecules. This feature raises questions on the nature of the photoactive pigment, which supports light-induced oxidative water splitting in Photosystem II (PS II). In this study, flash-induced oxygen evolution patterns (FIOPs) were measured to address the question whether the Si state transition probabilities and/or the redox-potentials of the water oxidizing complex (WOC) in its different Si states are altered in A. marina cells compared to that of spinach thylakoids. The analysis of the obtained data within the framework of different versions of the Kok model reveals that in light activated A. marina cells the miss probability is similar compared to spinach thylakoids. This finding indicates that the redox-potentials and kinetics within the WOC, of the reaction center (P680) and of Y-Z are virtually the same for both organisms. This conclusion is strongly supported by lifetime measurements of the S-2 and S-3 states. Virtually identical time constants were obtained for the slow phase of deactivation. Kinetic differences in the fast phase of S-2 and S-3 decay between A. marina cells and spinach thylakoids reflect a shift of the E-m of Y-D/Y-D(OX) to lower values in the former compared to the latter organisms, as revealed by the observation of an opposite change in the kinetics of S-0 oxidation to S-1 by Y-D(OX). A slightly increased double hit probability in A. marina cells is indicative of a faster Q(A)(-) to Q(B) electron transfer in these cells compared to spinach thylakoids.

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