This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Web of Science (151) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Keck, R. W. Articles by Boyer, J. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Keck, R. W. Articles by Boyer, J. S. Agricola Articles by Keck, R. W. Articles by Boyer, J. S.

Articles

Chloroplast Response to Low Leaf Water Potentials

III. Differing Inhibition of Electron Transport and Photophosphorylation ¹

^a Departments of Botany and Agronomv, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801

Cyclic and noncyclic photophosphorylation and electron transport by photosystem 1, photosystem 2, and from water to methyl viologen ("whole chain") were studied in chloroplasts isolated from sunflower (Helianthus annus L. var Russian Mammoth) leaves that had been desiccated to varying degrees. Electron transport showed considerable inhibition at leaf water potentials of –9 bars when the chloroplasts were exposed to an uncoupler in vitro, and it continued to decline in activity as leaf water potentials decreased. Electron transport by photosystem 2 and coupled electron transport by photosystem 1 and the whole chain were unaffected at leaf water potentials of –10 to –11 bars but became progressively inhibited between leaf water potentials of –11 and –17 bars. A low, stable activity remained at leaf water potentials below –17 bars. In contrast, both types of photophosphorylation were unaffected by leaf water potentials of –10 to –11 bars, but then ultimately became zero at leaf water potentials of –17 bars. Although the chloroplasts isolated from the desiccated leaves were coupled at leaf water potentials of –11 to –12 bars, they became progressively uncoupled as leaf water potentials decreased to –17 bars. Abscisic acid and ribonuclease had no effect on chloroplast photophosphorylation. The results are generally consistent with the idea that chloroplast activity begins to decrease at the same leaf water potentials that cause stomatal closure in sunflower leaves and that chloroplast electron transport begins to limit photosynthesis at leaf water potentials below about –11 bars. However, it suggests that, during severe desiccation, the limitation may shift from electron transport to photophosphorylation.

¹ This work was supported by Grant B-036-ILL from the Office of Water Resources Research, United States Department of Interior.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				O. K. Atkin and D. Macherel The crucial role of plant mitochondria in orchestrating drought tolerance Ann. Bot., February 1, 2009; 103(4): 581 - 597. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. W. Lawlor and W. Tezara Causes of decreased photosynthetic rate and metabolic capacity in water-deficient leaf cells: a critical evaluation of mechanisms and integration of processes Ann. Bot., February 1, 2009; 103(4): 561 - 579. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A.-C. TANG, Y. KAWAMITSU, M. KANECHI, and J. S. BOYER Photosynthetic Oxygen Evolution at Low Water Potential in Leaf Discs Lacking an Epidermis Ann. Bot., June 15, 2002; 89(7): 861 - 870. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. W. LAWLOR Limitation to Photosynthesis in Water-stressed Leaves: Stomata vs. Metabolism and the Role of ATP Ann. Bot., June 15, 2002; 89(7): 871 - 885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]