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 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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Boese, S. R. Articles by Huner, N. P.A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Boese, S. R. Articles by Huner, N. P.A. Agricola Articles by Boese, S. R. Articles by Huner, N. P.A.

Environmental and Stress Physiology

Developmental History Affects the Susceptibility of Spinach Leaves to in Vivo Low Temperature Photoinhibition ¹

Department of Plant Science, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5B7 Canada

Room temperature chlorophyll a fluorescence was used to determine the effects of developmental history, developmental stage, and leaf age on susceptibility of spinach to in vivo low temperature (5°C) induced photoinhibition. Spinach (Spinacia oleracea cv Savoy) leaves expanded at cold hardening temperatures (5°C day/night), an irradiance of 250 micromoles per square meter per second of photosynthetic proton flux density, and a photoperiod of 16 hours were less sensitive than leaves expanded at nonhardening temperatures (16 or 25°C day/night) and the same irradiance and photoperiod. This differential sensitivity to low-temperature photoinhibition was observed at high (1200) but not lower (500 or 800 micromoles per square meter per second) irradiance treatment. In spite of a differential sensitivity to photoinhibition, both cold-hardened and nonhardened spinach exhibited similar recovery kinetics at either 20 or 5°C. Shifting plants grown at 16°C (day/night) to 5°C (day/night) for 12 days after full leaf expansion did not alter the sensitivity to photoinhibition at 5°C. Conversely, shifting plants grown at 5°C (day/night) to 16°C (day/night) for 12 days produced a sensitivity to photoinhibition at 5°C similar to control plants grown at 16°C. Thus, any resistance to low-temperature photoinhibition acquired during growth at 5°C was lost in 12 days at 16°C. We conclude that leaf developmental history, developmental stage, and leaf age contribute significantly to the in vivo photoinhibitory response of spinach. Thus, these characteristics must be defined clearly in studies of plant susceptibility to photoinhibition.

¹ This research was supported by an operating grant from the National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada to N.P.A.H.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Hirotsu, A. Makino, A. Ushio, and T. Mae Changes in the Thermal Dissipation and the Electron Flow in the Water-Water Cycle in Rice Grown Under Conditions of Physiologically Low Temperature Plant Cell Physiol., May 15, 2004; 45(5): 635 - 644. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]