Naumburg Elke, Ellsworth David S, Katul Gabriel G
Desert Research Institute, 755 E Flamingo Rd, 89119, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 27708-0328, Durham, NC, USA.
Oecologia. 2001 Feb;126(4):487-499. doi: 10.1007/s004420000543. Epub 2001 Feb 1.
Dynamic responses of understory plants to sunflecks have been extensively studied, but how much differences in dynamic light responses affect daily photosynthesis (A ) is still the subject of active research. Recent models of dynamic photosynthesis have provided a quantitative tool that allows the critical assessment of the importance of these sunfleck responses on A . Here we used a dynamic photosynthesis model to assess differences in four species that were growing in ambient and elevated CO. We hypothesized that Liriodendron tulipifera, a species with rapid photosynthetic induction gain and slow induction loss, would have the least limitations to sunfleck photosynthesis relative to the other three species (Acer rubrum, Cornus florida, Liquidambar styraciflua). As a consequence, L. tulipifera should have the highest A in an understory environment, despite being the least shade tolerant of the species tested. We further hypothesized that daily photosynthetic enhancement by elevated CO would differ from enhancement levels observed during light-saturated, steady-state measurements. Both hypotheses were supported by the model results under conditions of low daily photosynthetic photon flux density (PFD; <3% of the above-canopy PFD). However, under moderate PFD (10-20% of the above-canopy PFD), differences in dynamic sunfleck responses had no direct impact on A for any of the species, since stomatal and photosynthetic induction limitations to sunfleck photosynthesis were small. Thus, the relative species ranking in A under moderate PFD closely matched their rankings in steady-state measurements of light-saturated photosynthesis. Similarly, under elevated CO, enhancement of modeled A over A at ambient CO matched the enhancement measured under light saturation. Thus, the effects of species-specific differences in dynamic sunfleck responses, and differences in elevated CO responses of daily photosynthesis, are most important in marginal light environments.
林下植物对光斑的动态响应已得到广泛研究,但动态光响应的差异对每日光合作用(A)的影响程度仍是积极研究的课题。最近的动态光合作用模型提供了一种定量工具,可用于关键评估这些光斑响应对A的重要性。在此,我们使用动态光合作用模型评估了在环境CO和高浓度CO条件下生长的四个物种之间的差异。我们假设,鹅掌楸(Liriodendron tulipifera)这种具有快速光合诱导增益和缓慢诱导损失的物种,相对于其他三个物种(红枫(Acer rubrum)、多花梾木(Cornus florida)、胶皮糖香树(Liquidambar styraciflua)),对光斑光合作用的限制最小。因此,尽管鹅掌楸是所测试物种中耐荫性最差的,但在林下环境中它的A值应该最高。我们进一步假设,高浓度CO对每日光合作用的增强作用将不同于在光饱和、稳态测量中观察到的增强水平。在每日光合光子通量密度(PFD)较低(<冠层上方PFD的3%)的条件下,模型结果支持了这两个假设。然而,在中等PFD(冠层上方PFD的10 - 20%)下,动态光斑响应的差异对任何物种的A都没有直接影响,因为气孔和光合诱导对光斑光合作用的限制很小。因此,在中等PFD下A的相对物种排名与它们在光饱和光合作用的稳态测量中的排名密切匹配。同样,在高浓度CO条件下,模型A在高浓度CO下相对于环境CO下的A的增强与在光饱和下测量的增强相匹配。因此,物种特异性动态光斑响应差异以及每日光合作用对高浓度CO响应的差异在边缘光环境中最为重要。