Photoregulation and photodamage in Schefflera arboricola leaves adapted to different light environments
U. Schiefthaler, A. W. Russell, H. R. Bolhàr-Nordenkampf and
C. Critchley
Australian Journal of Plant Physiology
26(5) 485 - 494
Published: 1999
Abstract
Leaves of the subtropical understorey shrub Schefflera arboricola Hayata growing in full sunlight had higher specific leaf weight, higher chlorophyll a/b ratios, lower total chlorophyll content and a threefold higher xanthophyll cycle pigment content than leaves growing in a naturally shaded, but sunfleck-punctuated, environment. A number of measurements, all made in situ and during natural day/night cycles, were taken as follows: current photochemical capacity (F√F m after 10 min dark-adaptation), size and epoxidation state of the xanthophyll cycle, CO 2 gas exchange and determination of the D1 synthesis rate. In sun leaves the lowest daily F√F m was found to be approximately 0.6, the change from maximum correlating with an increase in zeaxanthin. Daily changes in zeaxanthin were partly due to de novo synthesis and turnover. We suggest that sun leaves can dissipate most of the excess light energy absorbed safely via the photoprotective xanthophyll cycle. D1 synthesis rates did not correlate with photosynthetic photon flux density or F√F m . The shade leaves had high F√F m values and constant photosynthetic rates throughout the day except during sunflecks, when photosynthetic rates increased and D1 synthesis accelerated, all without a substantial decrease in F√F m . It seems that leaves of S. arboricola adapted to natural shade conditions can use sunflecks to contribute significantly to their pro-ductivity. The third leaf type investigated was from greenhouse-grown plants of S. arboricola after exposure to full sunlight. These leaves showed a rapid and large reduction in F√F m (to 0.3), which neither correlated with zeaxanthin formation nor recovered within the same day. From long-term effects following full sunlight exposure of greenhouse-grown plants we suggest that this F√F m reduction actually reflects photodestruction.https://doi.org/10.1071/PP98102
© CSIRO 1999