Comparison of light response models of photosynthesis in leaves of Periploca sepium under drought stress in sand habitat formed from seashells

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00012

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims Our objectives were to find the optimal models for different drought stresses by comparing four light response models of photosynthesis in leaves of Periploca sepium growing in sand formed from seashells, investigate the adaptability law of parameters of light response models to drought stresses, and define the adaptability of P. sepium to the shell sand moisture conditions.
Methods We used three-year-old P. sepium grown in shell ridge island of China’s Yellow River Delta as experimental material, set up four moisture conditions simulating those in shell sand, measured light responses of photosynthesis in leaves of P. sepium under different drought stresses using CIRAS-2 portable photosynthesis system, and fitted and analyzed the light response curves by four models: rectangular hyperbola, non-rectangular hyperbola, exponential and modified rectangular hyperbola.
Important findings The sequence of fitting effect of the four light response models was in descending order: modified rectangular hyperbola model > non-rectangular hyperbola model > exponential model > rectangular hyperbola model. This result was related to the latter three models not having extreme values, not fitting the process of light response curve declining after light saturation point (LSP), and not directly and accurately solving maximum net photosynthetic rate (P_nmax) and LSP. Among them, the non-rectangular hyperbola model best fit dark respiration rate (R_d), the rectangular hyperbola model best fit light compensation point (LCP) and modified rectangular hyperbola model best fit P_nmax and LSP. The adaptabilities of the four models to different drought stresses varied. The modified rectangular hyperbola model well fit the curves under all the drought stresses, the rectangular hyperbola model and exponential model suited mild drought stress and the non-rectangular hyperbola model suited severe drought stress. The light response parameters, including apparent quantum yield (AQY), R_d, LCP, P_nmax and LSP, responded to drought stresses differently. AQY, R_d and LCP first increased and then decreased with the aggravation of drought stress, while P_n, P_nmax and LSP decreased gradually. LSP decreased by 5.2%, 16.3% and 34.55% under light stress, moderate stress and severe stress, respectively, in comparison to the control (1556 μmol·m^-2·s^-1). P_nmaxdecreased by 17.8%, 39.0% and 59.0% compared to the control (22.58 μmol·m^-2·s^-1). Light use capability of P. sepium leaf was strongest and light ecological amplitude (1520 μmol·m^-2·s^-1) was widest under sufficient water condition; photo-saturation and photo-inhibition occurred significantly, light use capability weakened, and photosynthetic capacity was inhibited seriously under severe stress.

null

Key words: light response model, net photosynthetic rate, photosynthetic parameter, shell ridge island, soil water

WANG Rong-Rong, XIA Jiang-Bao, YANG Ji-Hua, ZHAO Yan-Yun, LIU Jing-Tao, SUN Jing-Kuan. Comparison of light response models of photosynthesis in leaves of Periploca sepium under drought stress in sand habitat formed from seashells[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2013, 37(2): 111-121.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00012

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2013/V37/I2/111

Figures/Tables 5

References 37

[1]	An YY, Liang ZS, Han RL, Liu GB (2007). Effects of soil drought on seedling growth and water metabolism of three common shrubs in Loess Plateau, Northwest China. Frontiers of Foresty in China, 2, 410-416.
[2]	An YY, Liang ZS, Hao WF (2011). Growth and physiological responses of the Periploca sepium Bunge seedlings to drought stress. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31, 716-725. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 安玉艳, 梁宗锁, 郝文芳 (2011). 杠柳幼苗对不同强度干旱胁迫的生长与生理响应. 生态学报, 31, 716-725.]
[3]	Aspinwall MJ, King JS, McKeand SE, Domec JC, Whitehead D (2011). Leaf-level gas-exchange uniformity and photosynthetic capacity among loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) genotypes of contrasting inherent genetic variation. Tree Physiology, 31, 78-91. DOI URL
[4]	Bamba T, Sando T, Miyabashira A, Gyokusen K, Nakazawa Y, Su Y, Fukusaki E, Kobayashhi A (2007). Periploca sepium Bunge as a model plant for rubber biosynthesis study. Zeitschrift Fur Naturforschung C, 62, 579-582.
[5]	Chen J, Zhang GC, Zhang SY, Wang MJ (2008). Response processes of Aralia elata photosynthesis and transpiration to light and soil moisture. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 1471-1480. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 陈建, 张光灿, 张淑勇, 王梦军 (2008). 辽东楤木光合和蒸腾作用对光照和土壤水分的响应过程. 应用生态学报, 32, 1471-1480.]
[6]	Chen ZC, Wang RR, Wang ZW, Yang JH, Wang HT, Geng B, Zhang YT (2012). Light response of photosynthesis of Koelreuteria paniculata Laxm. under different soil water conditions. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 10(3), 105-110. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 陈志成, 王荣荣, 王志伟, 杨吉华, 王华田, 耿兵, 张永涛 (2012). 不同土壤水分条件下栾树光合作用的光响应. 中国水土保持科学, 10(3), 105-110.]
[7]	Chen ZY, Peng ZS, Yang J, Chen WY, Ouyang ZM (2011). A mathematical model for describing light-response curves in Nicotiana tabacum L. Photosynthetica, 49, 467-471.
[8]	Duan AG, Zhang JG (2009). Selection of models of photosynthesis in response to irradiance and definition of attribute of weak light. Forest Research, 22, 765-771. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 段爱国, 张建国 (2009). 光合作用光响应曲线模型选择及低光强属性界定. 林业科学研究, 22, 765-771.]
[9]	Han G, Zhao Z (2010). Light response characteristics of photosynthesis of four xerophilous shrubs under different soil moistures. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 30, 4019-4026. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 韩刚, 赵忠 (2010). 不同土壤水分下4种沙生灌木的光合光响应特性. 生态学报, 30, 4019-4026.]
[10]	Jiang H, Zhou GY, Huang YH, Liu SZ, Tang XL (2011). Photosynthetic characteristics of canopy-dwelling vines in lower subtropical evergreen broad-leaved forest and response to environmental factors. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 35, 567-576. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[ 江浩, 周国逸, 黄钰辉, 刘世忠, 唐旭利 (2011). 南亚热带常绿阔叶林林冠不同部位藤本植物的光合生理特征及其对环境因子的适应. 植物生态学报, 35, 567-576.]
[11]	Lang Y, Zhang GC, Zhang ZK, Liu SS, Liu DH, Hu XL (2011). Light response of photosynthesis and its simulation in leaves of Prunus sibirica L. under different soil water conditions. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31, 4499-4509. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 郎莹, 张光灿, 张征坤, 刘顺生, 刘德虎, 胡小兰 (2011). 不同土壤水分下山杏光合作用光响应过程及其模拟. 生态学报, 31, 4499-4509.]
[12]	Lewis JD, Olszyk D, Tingey DT (1999). Seasonal patterns of photosynthetic light response in Douglas-fir seedlings subjected to elevated atmospheric CO₂ and temperature. Tree Physiology, 19, 243-252. DOI URL
[13]	Li YX, Yang ZQ, Zhang FC (2011). Applicability of different photosynthesis models for winter wheat in the Lower Yangtze River . Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 32, 588-592. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 李永秀, 杨再强, 张富存 (2011). 光合作用模型在长江下游冬麦区的适用性研究. 中国农业气象, 32, 588-592.]
[14]	Liu SL, Ma MD, Pan YZ, Wei LL, He CX, Yang KM (2012). Effects of light regimes on photosynthetic characteristics and antioxidant system in seedlings of two alder species. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 1062-1074. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[ 刘柿良, 马明东, 潘远智, 魏刘利, 何成相, 杨开茂 (2012). 不同光强对两种桤木幼苗光合特性和抗氧化系统的影响. 植物生态学报, 36, 1062-1074.]
[15]	Lu PL, Yu Q, Luo Y, Liu JD (2001). Light-response curves fitting of photosynthesis in winter wheat. Chinese Journal of Agrometeorology, 22(2), 12-14. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 陆佩玲, 于强, 罗毅, 刘建栋 (2001). 冬小麦光合作用的光响应曲线的拟合. 中国农业气象, 22(2), 12-14.]
[16]	Misra A, Tyler G (1999). Influence of soil moisture on soil solution chemistry and concentrations of minerals in the calcicoles Phleum phleoides and Veronica spicata grown on a limestone soil. Annals of Botany, 84, 401-410. DOI URL
[17]	Prado CHBA, Moraes JD (1997). Photosynthetic capacity and specific leaf mass in twenty woody species of Cerrado vegetation under field condition. Photosynthetica, 33, 103-112. DOI URL
[18]	Tartachnyk II, Blanke MM (2004). Effect of delayed fruit harvest on photosynthesis, transpiration and nutrient remobilization of apple leaves. New Phytologist, 164, 441-450. DOI URL
[19]	Thornley JHM (1976). Mathematical Models in Plant Physiology. Academic Press, London. 86-110.
[20]	Wang SJ, Huang DZ, Yan HX, Xu XH, Ma XC (2011). Applicability of four empirical models on photosynthesis light response of Populus szechuanica Schneid. Journal of Beihua University (Natural Science), 12, 208-212. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 王圣杰, 黄大庄, 闫海霞, 徐学华, 马向超 (2011). 4种经验模型在藏川杨光响应研究中的适用性. 北华大学学报(自然科学版), 12, 208-212.]
[21]	Xia JB, Tian JY, Zhang GC, Li T (2009). Photosynthetic and physiological characteristics of three shrubs species in Shell Islands of Yellow River Delta. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 29, 1452-1459. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 夏江宝, 田家怡, 张光灿, 李田 (2009). 黄河三角洲贝壳堤岛3种灌木光合生理特征研究. 西北植物学报, 29, 1452-1459.]
[22]	Xia JB, Zhang GC, Liu X, Sun JK (2011). Threshold effects of photosynthetic and physiological parameters in Prunus sibirica to soil moisture and light intensity. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 35, 322-329. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
	[ 夏江宝, 张光灿, 刘霞, 孙景宽 (2011). 山杏叶片光合生理参数对土壤水分和光照强度的阈值效应. 植物生态学报, 35, 322-329.]
[23]	Xia JB, Zhang SY, Zhang GC, Xie WJ, Lu ZH (2011). Critical responses of photosynthetic efficiency in Campsis radicans (L.) Seem to soil water and light intensities. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10, 17748-17754.
[24]	Xie WJ, Zhao YY, Zhang ZD, Liu Q, Xia JB, Sun JK, Tian JY, Sun TQ (2012). Shell sand properties and vegetative distribution on shell ridges of the Southwestern Coast of Bohai Bay. Environmental Earth Sciences, 67, 1357-1362. DOI URL
[25]	Xu DQ (2002). Efficiency of Photosynthesis. Shanghai Science and Technology Press, Shanghai. 13-15, 33. (in Chinese)
	[ 许大全 (2002). 光合作用效率. 上海科学技术出版社, 上海. 13-15, 33.]
[26]	Yang CH, Wang YY, Zhou ZF, Zhang GC (2006). Response of gas exchange parameters of Periploca sepium Bunge to soil water content in Loess Plateau. Forest Research, 19, 231-234. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 杨朝瀚, 王艳云, 周泽福, 张光灿 (2006). 黄土丘陵区杠柳叶片气体交换过程对土壤水分的响应. 林业科学研究, 19, 231-234.]
[27]	Ye ZP (2007). A new model for relationship between irradiance and the rate of photosynthesis in Oryza sativa. Photosynthetica, 45, 637-640.
[28]	Ye ZP (2010). A review on modeling of responses of photosynthesis to light and CO₂. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 34, 727-740. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 叶子飘 (2010). 光合作用对光和CO₂响应模型的研究进展. 植物生态学报, 34, 727-740.]
[29]	Ye ZP, Kang HJ (2012). Study on biological significance of coefficients in modified model of photosynthesis- irradiance. Journal of Yangzhou University (Agricultural and Life Science Edition), 33(2), 51-57. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 叶子飘, 康华靖 (2012). 植物光响应修正模型中系数的生物学意义研究. 扬州大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 33(2), 51-57.]
[30]	Ye ZP, Wang JL (2009). Study on Kok effect of rice based on the modified model of light-response of photosynthesis. Journal of Yangzhou University (Agricultural and Life Science Edition), 30(3), 5-10. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 叶子飘, 王建林 (2009). 基于植物光响应修正模型的水稻Kok效应研究. 扬州大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 30(3), 5-10.]
[31]	Ye ZP, Yu Q (2008). Comparison of new and several classical models of photosynthesis in response to irradiance. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 32, 1356-1361. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 叶子飘, 于强 (2008). 光合作用光响应模型的比较. 植物生态学报, 32, 1356-1361.]
[32]	Yu Q, Zhang YQ, Liu YF, Shi PL (2004). Simulation of the stomatal conductance of winter wheat in response to light, temperature and CO₂ changes. Annals of Botany, 93, 435-441.
[33]	Yun LY, Cao B (2007). The data fitting based on the optimized relative error. Statistics and Decision, ( 21), 15-16. (in Chinese)
	[ 云连英, 曹勃 (2007). 基于优化的相对误差意义下的数据拟合. 统计与决策, ( 21), 15-16.]
[34]	Zhang J, Gao WY, Wang J, Li XL (2012). Effects of sucrose concentration and exogenous hormones on growth and periplocin accumulation in adventitious roots of Periploca sepium Bunge. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 34, 1345-1351.
[35]	Zhang LY, Wen GS, Wang SJ, Liu ZL (2011). Four light-response models to estimate photosynthesis of Phyllostachys pubescens. Journal of Zhejiang A & F University, 28, 187-193. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 张利阳, 温国胜, 王圣杰, 刘兆玲 (2011). 毛竹光响应模型适用性分析. 浙江农林大学学报, 28, 187-193.]
[36]	Zhu YN, Zhang YS, Ji RP, Che YS, Gao XN (2012). Fitting light response curve of photosynthesis of maize under drought stress. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 43, 3-7. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 朱永宁, 张玉书, 纪瑞鹏, 车宇胜, 高西宁 (2012). 干旱胁迫下3种玉米光响应曲线模型的比较. 沈阳农业大学学报, 43, 3-7.]
[37]	Zu YG, Wei XX, Yu JH, Li DW, Pang HH, Tong L (2011). Response in the physiology and biochemistry of Korean pine (Pinus koraiensis) under supplementary UV-B radiation. Photosynthetica, 49, 448-458.

光响应模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	光响应参数 Light response parameter				R²
光响应模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	暗呼吸速率 R_d (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	光补偿点 LCP (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	最大净光合速率P_nmax(μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	光饱和点 LSP (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	R²
实测值 Measured value	CK	1.49	32	22.53	1700	-
	T1	2.04	42	18.59	1600	-
	T2	1.90	59	13.54	1300	-
	T3	1.43	49	9.16	1000	-
直角双曲线模型 Rectangular hyperbola model	CK	2.77	31	30.00	338	0.989
	T1	3.94	43	26.10	276	0.992
	T2	3.61	54	20.07	292	0.978
	T3	3.19	44	13.17	170	0.947
非直角双曲线模型 Non-rectangular hyperbola model	CK	1.37	23	30.00	532	0.999
	T1	2.08	28	30.00	433	0.999
	T2	1.96	51	17.77	506	0.998
	T3	1.38	46	10.50	396	0.988
指数模型 Exponential model	CK	2.48	35	25.21	874	0.999
	T1	2.73	39	21.26	648	1.000
	T2	2.87	52	16.46	541	0.995
	T3	2.32	43	11.05	329	0.981
直角双曲线修正模型 Modified rectangular hyperbola model	CK	2.52	36	22.58	1556	0.999
	T1	2.97	42	18.57	1475	1.000
	T2	2.68	56	13.77	1302	0.998
	T3	2.15	47	9.26	1019	0.998

光响应模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	光响应参数 Light response parameter				R²
光响应模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	暗呼吸速率 R_d (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	光补偿点 LCP (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	最大净光合速率P_nmax(μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	光饱和点 LSP (μmol·m^-2·s^-1)	R²
实测值 Measured value	CK	1.49	32	22.53	1700	-
	T1	2.04	42	18.59	1600	-
	T2	1.90	59	13.54	1300	-
	T3	1.43	49	9.16	1000	-
直角双曲线模型 Rectangular hyperbola model	CK	2.77	31	30.00	338	0.989
	T1	3.94	43	26.10	276	0.992
	T2	3.61	54	20.07	292	0.978
	T3	3.19	44	13.17	170	0.947
非直角双曲线模型 Non-rectangular hyperbola model	CK	1.37	23	30.00	532	0.999
	T1	2.08	28	30.00	433	0.999
	T2	1.96	51	17.77	506	0.998
	T3	1.38	46	10.50	396	0.988
指数模型 Exponential model	CK	2.48	35	25.21	874	0.999
	T1	2.73	39	21.26	648	1.000
	T2	2.87	52	16.46	541	0.995
	T3	2.32	43	11.05	329	0.981
直角双曲线修正模型 Modified rectangular hyperbola model	CK	2.52	36	22.58	1556	0.999
	T1	2.97	42	18.57	1475	1.000
	T2	2.68	56	13.77	1302	0.998
	T3	2.15	47	9.26	1019	0.998

光合模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	相对误差 RE
光合模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	暗呼吸速率 R_d	光补偿点 LCP	最大净光合速率 P_nmax	光饱和点 LSP
直角双曲线模型 Rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.860	0.007	0.332	0.801
	T1	0.931	0.023	0.404	0.828
	T2	0.898	0.086	0.482	0.775
	T3	1.224	0.114	0.438	0.830
非直角双曲线模型 Non-rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.079	0.263	0.332	0.687
	T1	0.016	0.319	0.614	0.729
	T2	0.030	0.148	0.312	0.611
	T3	0.037	0.066	0.146	0.604
指数模型 Exponential model	CK	0.669	0.121	0.119	0.486
	T1	0.337	0.064	0.143	0.595
	T2	0.508	0.122	0.215	0.584
	T3	0.621	0.129	0.207	0.671
直角双曲线修正模型 Modified rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.695	0.152	0.002	0.085
	T1	0.456	0.001	0.001	0.078
	T2	0.413	0.058	0.017	0.001
	T3	0.503	0.047	0.011	0.019

光合模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	相对误差 RE
光合模型 Light response model	干旱处理Drought treatment	暗呼吸速率 R_d	光补偿点 LCP	最大净光合速率 P_nmax	光饱和点 LSP
直角双曲线模型 Rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.860	0.007	0.332	0.801
	T1	0.931	0.023	0.404	0.828
	T2	0.898	0.086	0.482	0.775
	T3	1.224	0.114	0.438	0.830
非直角双曲线模型 Non-rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.079	0.263	0.332	0.687
	T1	0.016	0.319	0.614	0.729
	T2	0.030	0.148	0.312	0.611
	T3	0.037	0.066	0.146	0.604
指数模型 Exponential model	CK	0.669	0.121	0.119	0.486
	T1	0.337	0.064	0.143	0.595
	T2	0.508	0.122	0.215	0.584
	T3	0.621	0.129	0.207	0.671
直角双曲线修正模型 Modified rectangular hyperbola model	CK	0.695	0.152	0.002	0.085
	T1	0.456	0.001	0.001	0.078
	T2	0.413	0.058	0.017	0.001
	T3	0.503	0.047	0.011	0.019