|
Plant Physiol. (1999) 121: 89-96
Chloroplast Acclimation in Leaves of Guzmania
monostachia in Response to High Light1
Kate Maxwell*,
Joanne L. Marrison,
Rachel M. Leech,
Howard Griffiths, and
Peter Horton
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, King George
VI Building, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United
Kingdom (K.M., H.G.); Department of Biology, The University of York,
P.O. Box 373, York YO1 5YW, United Kingdom (J.L.M., R.M.L.); and Robert
Hill Institute, Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology,
University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TN, United
Kingdom (P.H.)
 |
ABSTRACT |
Acclimation of leaves to high light
(HL; 650 µmol m 2 s 1) was investigated in
the long-lived epiphytic bromeliad Guzmania monostachia and compared with plants maintained under low light (LL; 50 µmol m 2 s 1). Despite a 60% decrease in total
chlorophyll in HL-grown plants, the chlorophyll a/b
ratio remained stable. Additionally, chloroplasts from HL-grown plants
had a much lower thylakoid content and reduced granal stacking.
Immunofluorescent labeling techniques were used to quantify the level
of photosynthetic polypeptides. HL-grown plants had 30% to 40% of the
content observed in LL-grown plants for the light-harvesting complex
associated with photosystems I and II, the 33-kD photosystem II
polypeptide, and Rubisco. These results were verified using
conventional biochemical techniques, which revealed a comparable 60%
decrease in Rubisco and total soluble protein. When expressed on a
chlorophyll basis, the amount of protein and Rubisco was constant for
HL- and LL-grown plants. Acclimation to HL involves a tightly
coordinated adjustment of photosynthesis, indicating a highly regulated
decrease in the number of photosynthetic units manifested at the level
of the content of light-harvesting and electron transport components, the amount of Rubisco, and the induction of Crassulacean acid metabolism. This response occurs in mature leaves and may represent a
strategy that is optimal for the resource-limited epiphytic niche.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The acclimation of higher plants to contrasting light regimes
involves specific features of leaf structure and chloroplast composition (for reviews, see Boardman, 1977 ; Björkman, 1981 ; Anderson, 1986 ; Anderson et al., 1988 , 1996 ). Leaves of shade plants
are usually thinner than comparable sun leaves of the same species and
have large and numerous chloroplasts, arranged in parallel to the leaf
surface in order to maximize light absorption. In contrast, sun plants
may have smaller and fewer chloroplasts arranged perpendicular to the
surface. Shade chloroplasts have a high thylakoid membrane volume, and
a large number of stacks per granum, whereas sun chloroplasts have a
reduced thylakoid volume and granal stacking. In most cases, the
chlorophyll a/b ratio is reduced and the PSII antenna size
is increased in shade plants. This is coupled to a higher ratio of
PSII/PSI and decreased levels of Rubisco. Acclimation to particular
light environments within a species also involves comparable functional
and compositional changes to the leaf morphology, thylakoid membrane
composition, and enzyme complement. However, the same responses to
photon flux density (PFD) are not universally observed in all species
(Chow et al., 1991 ; McKiernan and Baker, 1991 ; Walters and Horton,
1995 ; Murchie and Horton, 1997 ).
Acclimation of photosynthesis has tended to be rationalized in terms of
optimizing photosynthetic efficiency in sun and shade conditions:
maximizing light capture in low light (LL) and photosynthetic capacity
in high light (HL). However, when plants are exposed to light levels in
excess of those that can be used in photosynthesis, there is a
potential for photodamage to the proteins and pigments of the thylakoid
membrane (Osmond, 1981 ; Powles, 1984 ). Therefore, it has been argued
that some aspects of the long-term HL response are related to
photoprotection (Anderson and Osmond, 1987 ; Horton, 1987 ; Anderson et
al., 1996 ; Murchie and Horton, 1998 ), and acclimation is concerned with
balancing efficient light utilization while protecting against
photodamage. Many previous studies have been performed using crop
plants under conditions that permit leaf expansion and development
under the particular experimental regime, complicating interpretation.
In this paper, data are presented regarding mature leaves in a
plant species that is both slow growing and subject to large
fluctuations in irradiance under natural conditions. Therefore, an
extreme photoprotective strategy would be predicted.
Guzmania monostachia (L.) Rusby ex Mez var
monostachia is an epiphytic bromeliad common throughout the
middle to upper canopy in tropical forests in Trinidad (Pittendrigh,
1948 ; Griffiths and Smith, 1983 ). It has previously been demonstrated
that acclimation to both HL and LL is rapid and reversible in this
species (Maxwell et al., 1994 , 1995 ). G. monostachia has a
large potential for nonphotochemical dissipation of excess absorbed
light energy (Ruban et al., 1993 ; Maxwell et al., 1994 , 1995 ), a
process induced when plants are exposed to prolonged light stress
conditions. HL acclimation in G. monostachia is associated
with a decrease in chlorophyll content and an increase in the
xanthophyll cycle carotenoids coupled to metabolic changes, as shown by
the induction of CAM (Maxwell et al., 1994 ).
In this paper we describe the changes in chloroplast structure and
composition that accompany these functional changes. Immunolabeling of
thin leaf sections has enabled localization of specific enzymes in
different parts of the leaf and has even shown the subcellular distribution (Marrison and Leech, 1992 ; Marrison et al., 1993 ; Williams
et al., 1998 ). In an extension of this technique and to develop the use
of immunolabeling in the study of light acclimation, the amounts of
individual proteins have been quantified in this study by determining
the intensity of immunofluorescence (Leech and Marrison, 1996 ). Using
improved image analysis, we describe the use of immunolabeling to
quantify changes in the levels of photosynthetic enzymes and thylakoid
membrane constituents in G. monostachia. This has allowed a
complete analysis of the acclimation of mature leaves.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plant Material
Guzmania monostachia (L.) Rusby ex Mez var
monostachia plants were collected from epiphytic sites in
March, 1995. Plants were removed from deciduous hosts within Verdant
Vale and the Simla Research Station, Trinidad, West Indies (grid
reference: PS869823, location 10°41 N, 61°17 W). On return to
the UK, the plants were maintained in a controlled-environment cabinet
(Sanyo Gallenkamp, Loughborough, UK) over a 10-h photoperiod (8 AM-6 PM). Day-night values
for temperature and RH were 25°C/23°C and 65%/80%, respectively. Plants were subjected to a HL regime (650 µmol
m 2 s 1) or a LL regime
(50 µmol m 2 s 1) for
at least 3 months prior to experimentation. The plants were watered and
provided with a complete nutrient solution (BabyBio, Pan Britannica
Industries, Hertfordshire, UK) every 2 d. The leaf material
described was sampled from the center of the blade for leaves of the
third innermost rosette. All tissues were sampled during the first
4 h of the photoperiod.
Chlorophyll Content
Five replicate leaf disc samples were taken and the extraction
procedure was as described by Maxwell et al. (1994) .
Transmission Electron Microscopy
Fresh leaf sections were cut by hand from the central portion of
the leaf and immediately fixed in 3% (w/v) glutaraldehyde in
0.1 M phosphate buffer overnight. The samples were then
washed in buffer, fixed in 2% (w/v) osmium tetroxide (aqueous)
for 2 h, dehydrated with 75% (v/v) ethanol, then 95%
(v/v) with three changes over 15 min, followed by absolute
ethanol and then propylene oxide for two 10-min periods. The tissue was
kept in Spurr's resin overnight and then for 3 d, with fresh
resin applied on a daily basis, before fixing in fresh Spurr's resin.
The sample was polymerized at 60°C overnight and 80-nm sections were
cut on a ultramicrotome. The sections were mounted on copper grids and
examined using a transmission electron microscope (model CM10, Philips,
Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
Light Microscopy, Immunolabeling, and Quantification of
Photosynthetic Proteins
Preparation of Leaf Tissue
Slices of leaf tissue (10 mm thick) were cut transversely from the
mid portion of the leaf, and each slice was further dissected into five
2-mm, consecutive, transverse slices. Three leaves from a single plant
at each light intensity were sampled. Slices of leaf tissue were fixed
overnight in 3% (w/v) paraformaldehyde, 50% (v/v) ethanol, and 5%
(v/v) acetic acid at room temperature and embedded in PEG 1500 (Fisons,
Bellevue, WA) as previously described (Marrison and Leech, 1992 ).
Transverse sections (10 µm) were cut on a microtome using a
disposable steel blade, placed onto dampened polysine slides (BDH,
Poole, UK), and left to dry on a hot plate overnight at 40°C. Ribbons
of five tissue sections from leaves grown under each light intensity
were analyzed together on a single microscope slide (total of 15 sections) to ensure uniformity of processing.
Immunolocalization
Immunolocalization was carried out as described by Marrison and
Leech (1992) for the following antibodies: the major light-harvesting complex of PSII (LHCII), the light-harvesting complex of PSI (LHCI), the 33-kD component of the oxygen-evolving complex of PSII (OEC33), Rubisco, and PEP carboxylase (PEPc). Sections were incubated overnight at 4°C with 100 µL of primary antibody diluted in 0.5% (w/v)
BSA/PBS. The antibodies used were gifts from Professor N.R. Baker
(University of Essex, UK; LHCI), Dr. R. Nechushtai (The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem; LHCII), Dr. A.J. Keys (Institute of Arable Crops
Research, Harpenden, UK; Rubisco), Professor J. Barber (Imperial
College, London; OEC33), and Professor H. Bohnert (University of
Arizona, Tucson; PEPc). The sections were washed for 15 min in 0.5%
(w/v) BSA/PBS, 0.01% (v/v) Tween 20/PBS, and PBS, and were then
incubated for 1 h at room temperature with 100 µL of fluorescein
isothiocyanate-conjugated goat-anti-rabbit antiserum (Sigma) diluted as
recommended by the supplier. The sections were washed as above and
mounted in Vectashield (Vectalabs, Burlingame, CA). Sections were
viewed using a Nikon FXA microscope with an epifluorescence attachment,
a high-pressure mercury lamp, and a filter combination of dichroic
mirror 510, excitation filter 450 to 490 nm, and barrier filter 515IF.
Photomicrographs were taken using Kodak Ektachrome 400 color slide film
with automatic exposure setting.
Measurement of Chloroplast Size
The chloroplast cross-sectional area was measured after
immunolocalization and photography (312× total magnification).
Chloroplasts that appeared to have the largest cross-sectional area
were measured from the 35-mm color slide film using a CCD TV camera
(TM-560, PULNiX America, Sunnyvale, CA) with a zoom lens (model
18-108/2.5, PULNiX) and image analysis software (Seescan, Cambridge,
UK). Mean chloroplast volume was calculated assuming the chloroplast cross-sectional plan area to be that of an oblate spheroid. Chloroplast volume was then calculated using the formula
4/3 r2(r/2), where
r is the radius of the circular plan area.
Quantification of Protein Levels
To quantify LHCI, LHCII, Rubisco, and OEC33 protein levels in
chloroplasts from plants grown at different light intensities, the
level of the chloroplast immunofluorescence obtained after immunolocalization was measured using a microphotometry system attached
to a fluorescence microscope and two-dimensional imaging software. Five
tissue sections from leaves grown under each of the light intensities
were analyzed together on a single microscope slide to ensure
uniformity of processing. The sensitivity of the microphotometry system
was set using tissue grown at a light intensity of 50 µmol photon
m 2 s 1 and
immunolocalization with Rubisco antisera and fluorescein isothiocyanate
(i.e. from the most abundant protein at maximal expression). The
maximum fluorescence value within 25 chloroplasts was recorded for each
light intensity (five chloroplasts from five different sections). The
product of the mean fluorescence value and the mean plastid volume was
used to calculate the total fluorescence value per plastid for each
PFD. This technique has recently been confirmed as an accurate
procedure for the quantification of chloroplast proteins (Leech and
Marrison, 1996 ).
Total Soluble Protein
Total soluble protein was calculated from five replicates taken
from individual plants. Approximately 100 mg of tissue was ground
in 0.5 mL of protein extraction buffer (450 mM Bicine, 50 mM 3-(cyclohexylamino)propanesulfonic acid [CAPS],
pH 10.3, 1% [w/v] PEG 600, 1% [w/v] SDS, and 50 mM
DTT). The samples were centrifuged at 13,000g for 5 min at
4°C. The supernatant (100 µL) was removed and added to 4 mL of
Bradford's reagent. The mixture was incubated for 15 min at room
temperature and the A595 was read.
Protein content was calculated from a calibration curve (0 100 µg of
BSA).
Western Blots
Leaf discs (2 cm2) were excised and
homogenized in 500 µL of protein extraction buffer. The samples were
centrifuged at 13,000g at 4°C for 5 min, and then the
proteins were precipitated with 4 volumes of 80% (v/v) acetone.
The samples were centrifuged at 4°C for 10 min, the supernatant was
discarded, and the pellet was resuspended in Hammelis buffer and boiled
for 3 min. The extracts were run on 10% (v/v) polyacrylamide
gels and probed with Rubisco antisera using goat-anti-rabbit secondary
antisera, following the procedure of Walker and Leegood (1996) .
Carboxyarbanitol-1-Bisphosphate (14CABP) Binding
Leaf tissue (300 mg) was excised and protein extracted at 4°C in
2 mL of extraction buffer (350 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 8.0, 10 mM MgCl2, 5 mM EDTA, 14 mM -mercaptoethanol, 3% [w/v] PVP 25, 15% [w/v]
PEG 20,000, and 2.5% [v/v] Tween 20), 20 µL of 100 mM
PMSF, and 200 mg of PVPP. Plant extract (200 mL) was mixed with 200 mL
of 14CABP-binding solution (200 mM
Na2SO4, 200 mM
Bicine-NaOH, pH 8.0, 80 mM MgCl2, 20 mM NaHCO3, 100 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 0.3 mM 14CABP, and 1 pCi pmol 1). The protein was precipitated with
288 µL of 60% (w/v) PEG 3400 at 4°C for 30 min and resedimented by
centrifugation at 10,000g for 10 min at 4°C. The pellet
was resuspended in 400 µL of PEG on ice for 15 min and resedimented
as above. Following a final PEG precipitation step, the pellet was
resuspended in 1 mL of 1% (v/v) Triton X-100 and radioactivity was
determined using a liquid scintillation counter. Calculations of
Rubisco content were made assuming that the molecular mass of pure
Rubisco is 550 kD with eight active sites per enzyme. The
14CABP was kindly provided by Dr. Martin Parry
(IACR-Rothamstead, UK).
Photosynthetic Capacity
Photosynthetic capacity was assessed from the light- and
CO2-saturated rate of O2
evolution measured using a leaf disc electrode system (LD2/2, Hansatech
UK, King's Lynn, UK) as previously described (Maxwell et al., 1994 ).
Measurements were made using five replicates at an actinic PFD of 400 µmol photon m 2 s 1,
which was saturating for both HL- and LL-grown plants.
Titratable Acidity
The magnitude of CAM activity was assessed from the dawn-to-dusk
level of titratable acidity ( H+). Leaf disc
samples were frozen prior to extraction in 4 mL of boiling water. A
1-mL aliquot was titrated against 10 mM NaOH using
phenolphthalein as an indicator.
 |
RESULTS |
Leaf Morphology
Light micrographs of LL and HL leaf sections of G. monostachia are shown in Figure 1.
In these examples, the tissue shows immunofluorescent labeling for the
LHCII, which was also used to derive quantitative data for this protein
(see below). Strong labeling was observed despite the use of a
heterologous antibody, and autofluorescence from the cell wall was also
apparent. Irrespective of the growth regime, the chlorenchyma and
chloroplasts were concentrated around and facing the air space, with
the chloroplasts facing the air space. A stalk cell was observed on a
number of chlorenchyma cells that extended into the air spaces (Fig.
1C). The number of chloroplasts per cell, the chloroplast
cross-sectional area, and the chloroplast volume were all reduced under
HL conditions (Table I).

View larger version (80K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 1.
Immunolocalization of PEG-embedded G. monostachia leaf sections (10 µm thick). A, LL at low
magnification; B, HL at low magnification; C, LL at high magnification;
and D, HL at high magnification. Leaf sections were incubated with
primary antisera to LHCII (A-D), Rubisco (E and F), OEC33 (G and H),
and PEPc (I and J) followed by secondary goat anti-rabbit antisera
conjugated to fluorescein isothiocyanate for LL plants (A, C, E, G, and
I) and HL plants (B, D, F, H, and J). The scale bars represent 50 µm
(A and B), 20 µm (C and D), and 10 µm (E-J).
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I.
Chloroplast characteristics of HL- and LL-acclimated
G. monostachia
The chloroplast data were calculated from 120 replicate sections taken
from five plants. The SD was <5% of the mean in all
cases.
|
|
Chloroplast Ultrastructure
All chloroplasts described were from spongy mesophyll cells
located around the air spaces. The HL chloroplasts were longer and
thinner, but smaller than the LL chloroplasts. The amount of thylakoid
per chloroplast and the amount of membrane stacking was considerably
reduced in HL plants. These differences were quantified and the results
are shown in Table I. The volume of thylakoid was approximately 38% of
the chloroplast in LL plants, while the thylakoid membrane accounted
for only 15% in HL plants. The LL plants had an average of 14 stacks
per granum but, in marked contrast, on average the number of stacks per
granum was five in the HL plants (Table I).
Immunoquantitation of Chloroplast Components
At high magnification in immunolabeled fluorescent images, the
individual chloroplasts are clearly seen and the chloroplasts of HL and
LL plants are shown after labeling with antibodies to LHCII (Fig. 1,
A-D), Rubisco (Fig. 1, E and F), and OEC33 (Fig. 1, G and H).
Additional images were obtained for LHCI (data not shown). In each case
there was a decrease in fluorescence intensity from LL to HL.
Measurement of the mean chloroplast cross-sectional area (Table I)
allowed estimation of the chloroplast volume, which, together with the
fluorescence intensity of the image, was used to calculate the relative
contents of each antigen per chloroplast (Fig.
2). For the thylakoid components (LHCII,
LHCI, and OEC33) and Rubisco, there was a parallel decrease of an
approximately similar magnitude in all plants, with the content in HL
plants being approximately 30% to 40% of that in LL plants (Fig. 2).

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 2.
Percentage maximum level of fluorescence per
chloroplast for HL and LL plants normalized to 100% for each component
under LL following immunolocalization using primary antisera to
Rubisco, OEC33, LHCII, and LHCI.
|
|
Total soluble protein was 3 and 9 mg g 1 fresh
weight for HL and LL plants, respectively (Table
II). Supporting data illustrating the
loss of Rubisco under HL is provided in Figure
3 using western blotting. In this
example, plants were transferred from LL to HL conditions over a 14-d
period. When proteins were extracted and probed with an antibody to the
Rubisco large subunit, it was apparent that over the experimental
period, considerable degradation of Rubisco had occurred (Fig. 3). The
amount of Rubisco was 1 mg g 1 fresh weight in
HL and 2.7 mg g 1 fresh weight in LL plants, as
quantified using 14CABP binding. Total
chlorophyll was 233 and 639 µg g 1 fresh
weight for HL and LL plants, respectively, while the chlorophyll a/b ratio remained constant (Table II). Similar results for
pigment and protein data were obtained when determined on an area basis (data not shown). When expressed per unit chlorophyll, the amount of
protein and Rubisco was comparable for HL and LL plants, while the
ratio of Rubisco per unit protein was slightly higher under LL (Table
II). The light- and CO2-saturated photosynthetic capacity (Pmax) was 6.4 and 3.2 µmol O2 m 2
s 1 for HL and LL plants, respectively. This is
equivalent to the maximum photosynthetic rates of 84 nmol
O2 mg 1 Chl for HL plants
and 15.3 nmol O2 mg 1 Chl
for LL plants.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II.
Chlorophyll, protein, and Rubisco content of HL-
and LL-acclimated G. monostachia
The pigment and protein data were calculated from five replicates
sampled from individual plants. The data are provided as the means ± SE.
|
|

View larger version (65K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 3.
Western blots showing the abundance of Rubisco in
leaves of G. monostachia over a 14-d transfer from LL to
HL conditions.
|
|
Immunodetection of PEPc
The level of immunofluorescence obtained for PEPc was below the
detection limit in the LL plants (Fig. 1I) but was clearly visible in
the image of the HL leaf (Fig. 1J), although quantification of this
diffuse image proved to be beyond the image analysis procedures. The
magnitude of CAM activity assessed as the dawn-to-dusk difference in
titratable acidity was 23 ± 1.8 and 115 ± 5.9 µg
g 1 fresh weight for LL and HL plants,
respectively.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Previously, the physiological basis of HL acclimation in leaves of
G. monostachia has been described under field (Maxwell et
al., 1992 , 1995 ) and laboratory conditions (Maxwell et al., 1994 ). We
are now able to rationalize these observations in the context of
acclimation of the chloroplast in response to the light environment. We
have demonstrated that HL acclimation involves a highly regulated
adjustment in mature leaves at the level of chloroplast volume,
thylakoid membrane composition, and complement of photosynthetic
protein (specifically, the number of functional photosynthetic units).
Although alternative strategies are observed, a number of
generalizations may be made regarding the acclimation of the
photosynthetic apparatus to HL (Anderson et al., 1996 ). The underlying
mechanisms result from the contrasting environmental pressures
experienced in LL as opposed to HL. While success under shade requires
maximal absorption and efficient transduction of light energy, plants in HL are optimized for maximizing photosynthetic light use, which may
be accompanied by a parallel reduction in excitation energy capture and
mechanisms that prevent long-term damage to the photosynthetic apparatus when energy capture exceeds the photosynthetic requirement. Increases in photosynthetic capacity are generally supported by adjustment of the composition of the thylakoid membrane proteins and
chloroplast ultrastructure. HL plants tend toward a smaller light-harvesting complex relative to the PSII reaction center, which is manifested as a reduced chlorophyll content and an increased chlorophyll a/b ratio (Boardman, 1977 ; Anderson et
al., 1988 ). However, it has been demonstrated that the chlorophyll
content may be stable under contrasting light, while there is an
increase in whole-chain electron transport rate and Rubisco activity in a strategy whereby light harvesting is constant but adjustments in the
photosynthetic capacity alone permit successful HL acclimation (Chow
and Anderson, 1987 ; McKiernan and Baker, 1991 ). Chow et al. (1991)
demonstrated that the chlorophyll a/b ratio is stable under
both HL and LL in Tradescantia albiflora despite a very significant increase in Rubisco activity, an example of a HL response dominated by acclimation within the stromal compartment of the chloroplast.
We have investigated chloroplastic acclimation to HL in leaves of
G. monostachia. Acclimation to HL resulted in a significant reduction in chloroplast size, thylakoid volume, and the extent of
granal stacking. This response was associated with a nearly parallel
reduction in amounts of LHCI, LHCII, OEC33, and Rubisco. While the
reduction of LHCII is a well-documented response to HL, the loss of
OEC33 (indicating a reduction in PSII core subunits) and Rubisco were
not predicted, since photosynthetic capacity was significantly higher
in HL plants. It is likely that the induction of CAM functions to
maintain or increase photosynthetic light use, and it is possible that
the higher levels of Rubisco in LL plants may reflect a storage role
for this protein in light-limited conditions.
It is therefore evident that the nature of acclimation to HL in
G. monostachia is unlike many of the conventional processes that arise in response to HL as outlined above. In this species, a more
extreme strategy is employed. When expressed per unit of chlorophyll,
it is evident that the amounts of protein and Rubisco are remarkably
constant in both HL and LL leaves, despite very significant absolute
reductions in chlorophyll and protein per unit area or fresh weight.
This observation, coupled to the stability of the chlorophyll
a/b ratio, suggests that acclimation to HL involves the
formation of fewer, but photosynthetically competent, photosynthetic
units.
As a consequence of HL acclimation, approximately 60% total soluble
protein and chlorophyll were degraded, indicating plastid protease
activity. Regulatory proteolysis is crucial for correct chloroplast
functioning in terms of chloroplast development, during stress, and for
the removal of ill-conformed, damaged, or malfunctioning proteins
(Schmidt and Mishkind, 1983 ; Desimone et al., 1998 ).
When evaluating the extreme features of the acclimation of G. monostachia to HL, several factors relating to the physiology and
ecology of this species may be taken into consideration. At an
ecological level, epiphytes are subject to a highly dynamic light
environment with a prolonged period of exposure to HL (Maxwell et al.,
1992 , 1995 ). Successful acclimation to this light environment therefore
requires both short-term strategies to dissipate excess excitation
energy and long-term acclimation to HL. In addition, the epiphytic
habitat is characterized by extreme resource limitation and relies on
animal/plant detritus and leachate for nutrition. Therefore, epiphytes
in general are slow-growing and have long-lived leaves (4-5 years).
Unlike many crop or ruderal plants, leaves of G. monostachia
exhibit a massive loss of photosynthetically competent units rather
than investing in photosynthetic proteins. It is possible that
breakdown and subsequent re-allocation of photosynthetic protein is a
critical component of HL acclimation in these and possibly other
species native to nutrient-limited habitats. For example, we have
demonstrated that the induction of CAM during HL acclimation in
G. monostachia involves de novo synthesis of PEPc (Fig. 1j).
It is entirely feasible that breakdown products could be re-utilized in
the formation of this protein (Winter et al., 1982 ). Additionally,
construction, maintenance, and repair costs are elevated under HL, and
therefore a reduction in the number of functional units may reflect the
limited carbon and nitrogen budgets available to epiphytic bromeliads.
In this respect, it is noteworthy that constant values for chlorophyll
a/b have been observed for a number of epiphytic bromeliads
under contrasting light environments in the field (Griffiths and
Maxwell, 1999 ), indicating that this acclimative strategy may be
genetically conserved within the Bromeliaceae. Despite the apparent
constraints imposed on epiphytes by resource-limited habitats, G. monostachia exhibits highly effective short- and long-term
strategies in response to HL that have permitted exploitation of the
epiphytic niche.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
1
This work was funded by the Natural Environment
Research Council, UK (grant no. GR3/8763).
*
Corresponding author; e-mail kate.maxwell{at}newcastle.ac.uk; fax
44-191-222-5228.
Received March 22, 1999;
accepted June 2, 1999.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We are to grateful Anne Borland (The University of Newcastle)
and to Sasha Ruban and Robin Walters (University of Sheffield) for
helpful comments and encouragement. Pauline Gaitens and John Proctor provided technical assistance with the transmission and scanning electron microscopy (University of Sheffield).
 |
LITERATURE CITED |
Anderson JM
(1986)
Photoregulation of the composition, function and structure of thylakoid membranes.
Annu Rev Plant Physiol
37:
93-136
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Anderson JM,
Chow WS,
Goodchild DJ
(1988)
Thylakoid membrane organization in sun/shade acclimation.
Aust J Plant Physiol
15:
11-26
[Web of Science]
Anderson JM,
Chow WS,
Park YI
(1996)
The grand design of photosynthesis: acclimation of the photosynthetic apparatus to environmental cues.
Photosynth Res
46:
129-139
Anderson JM,
Osmond CB
(1987)
Shade-sun responses: compromises between acclimation and photoinhibition.
In
DJ Kyle,
CB Osmond,
DJ Arntzen,
eds, Photoinhibition, Topics in Photosynthesis, Vol 9.
Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1-38
Björkman O
(1981)
Responses to different quantum flux intensities.
In
OL Lange,
PS Nobel,
CB Osmond,
H Ziegler,
eds, Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, Vol 12A.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 57-107
Boardman NK
(1977)
Comparative photosynthesis of sun and shade plants.
Annu Rev Plant Physiol
28:
355-377
[Web of Science]
Chow WS,
Adamson HY,
Anderson JM
(1991)
Photosynthetic acclimation of Tradescantia albiflora to growth irradiance: lack of adjustment of light-harvesting components and its consequences.
Plant Physiol
81:
175-182
[CrossRef]
Chow WS,
Anderson JM
(1987)
Photosynthetic responses of Pisum sativum to an increase in irradiance during growth. I. Photosynthetic activities.
Aust J Plant Physiol
14:
1-8
Desimone M,
Wagner E,
Johanningmeier U
(1998)
Degradation of active-oxygen modified ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase by chloroplastic proteases requires ATP-hydrolysis.
Planta
205:
459-466
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Griffiths H,
Maxwell K
(1999)
In memory of CS Pittendrigh: photoprotective strategies in epiphytic bromeliads in relation to exposure within the forest canopy.
Funct Ecol
13:
15-23
Griffiths H,
Smith JAC
(1983)
Photosynthetic pathways in the Bromeliaceae of Trinidad: relations between life-form, habitat preference and the occurrence of CAM.
Oecolgia
60:
176-184
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Horton P
(1987)
Interplay between environmental and metabolic factors in the regulation of electron transport in higher plants.
In
J Biggins,
eds, Progress in Photosynthesis Research, Vol II.
Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 681-688
Leech RM,
Marrison JL
(1996)
Immunofluorescent quantitation of chloroplast proteins.
Plant J
10:
1169-1175
[Medline]
Marrison JL,
Leech RM
(1992)
Co-immunolocalization of topoisomerase II and chloroplast DNA in developing, dividing and mature wheat chloroplasts.
Plant J
2:
783-790
Marrison JL,
Onyeocha L,
Baker A,
Leech RM
(1993)
Recognition of peroxisomes by immunofluorescence in transformed and untransformed tobacco cells.
Plant Physiol
103:
1055-1059
[Abstract]
Maxwell C,
Griffiths H,
Borland AM,
Broadmeadow MSJ,
Fordham MC
(1995)
Short term photosynthetic responses of the C3-CAM epiphyte Guzmania monostachia to simulated tropical seasonal transitions under field conditions.
Aust J Plant Physiol
22:
771-781
[Web of Science]
Maxwell C,
Griffiths H,
Borland AM,
Broadmeadow MSJ,
McDavid C
(1992)
Photoinhibitory responses of Guzmania monostachia during the dry season in Trinidad maintain photochemical integrity under adverse conditions.
Plant Cell Environ
15:
37-47
[CrossRef]
Maxwell C,
Griffiths H,
Young AJ
(1994)
Photosynthetic acclimation to light regime and water stress by the C3-CAM epiphyte Guzmania monostachia: gas exchange characteristics, photochemical efficiency and the xanthophyll cycle.
Funct Ecol
8:
746-754
McKiernan M,
Baker NR
(1991)
Adaptation to shade of the light-harvesting apparatus in Silene dioica.
Plant Cell Environ
14:
205-212
Murchie EH,
Horton P
(1997)
Acclimation of photosynthesis to irradiance and spectral quality in British plant species: chlorophyll content, photosynthetic capacity and growth preference.
Plant Cell Environ
20:
438-448
[CrossRef]
Murchie EH,
Horton P
(1998)
Contrasting patterns of photosynthetic acclimation to the light environment are dependent on the differential expression of the responses to altered irradiance and spectral quality.
Plant Cell Environ
21:
139-148
[CrossRef]
Osmond CB
(1981)
Photorespiration and photoinhibition: some implications for the energetics of photosynthesis.
Biochim Biophys Acta
639:
77-98
Pittendrigh CS
(1948)
The bromeliad-Anopheles-malaria complex in Trinidad. I. The bromeliad flora.
Evolution
2:
58-89
[Medline]
Powles SB
(1984)
Photoinhibition of photosynthesis induced by visible light.
Annu Rev Plant Physiol
35:
15-44
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Ruban AV,
Young AJ,
Horton P
(1993)
Induction of nonphotochemical energy dissipation and absorbance changes in leaves: evidence for changes in the state of the light harvesting system of photosystem II in vivo.
Plant Physiol
102:
741-750
[Abstract]
Schmidt GW,
Mishkind ML
(1983)
Rapid degradation of unassembled ribulose 1,5-bisphospahte carboxylase small subunits in chloroplasts.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
80:
2632-2636
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Walker RP,
Leegood RC
(1996)
Phosphorylation of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase in plants.
Biochem J
317:
653-657
Walters RG,
Horton P
(1995)
Acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to the light environment: regulation of chloroplast composition.
Planta
197:
475-481
[Web of Science][Medline]
Williams M,
Robertson EJ,
Leech RM,
Harwood JL
(1998)
The effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on lipid metabolism in leaves from mature wheat (Triticum aestivum cv. Hereward) plants.
Plant Cell Environ
21:
927-936
[CrossRef]
Winter K,
Foster JG,
Schmitt MR,
Edwards GE
(1982)
Activity and quantity of ribulosebisphosphate carboxylase- and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase-protein in two Crassulacean acid metabolism plants in relation to leaf age, nitrogen nutrition and point in time during a day/night cycle.
Planta
154:
309-317
[CrossRef][Web of Science]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. H. Murchie, S. Hubbart, S. Peng, and P. Horton
Acclimation of photosynthesis to high irradiance in rice: gene expression and interactions with leaf development
J. Exp. Bot.,
January 1, 2005;
56(411):
449 - 460.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
U. LUTTGE
Ecophysiology of Crassulacean Acid Metabolism (CAM)
Ann. Bot.,
June 1, 2004;
93(6):
629 - 652.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. H. Ratnayaka, W. T. Molin, and T. M. Sterling
Physiological and antioxidant responses of cotton and spurred anoda under interference and mild drought
J. Exp. Bot.,
October 1, 2003;
54(391):
2293 - 2305.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. H. Murchie, S. Hubbart, Y. Chen, S. Peng, and P. Horton
Acclimation of Rice Photosynthesis to Irradiance under Field Conditions
Plant Physiology,
December 1, 2002;
130(4):
1999 - 2010.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|