Paper · 1997 · Photosynthetica

The chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and changes of absorbance in pea chloroplasts

I.B. Ganago

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Chlorophyll (Chl) fluorescence quenching parameters were measured in dark-adapted pea leaves and chloroplasts with the purpose to find the conditions of high and low non-photochemical quenching, that would be stable during a prolonged irradiation. A PAM fluorometer was used for measuring induction curves in the range of actinic radiation of 3-35 W m-2, with an ordinary value of about 15 W m-2. The effects of various mediators, i.e., ascorbate, methyl viologen (MV), dithiothreitol (DTT) and nigericin, on the quenching process were tested. Simultaneously, the absorbance was measured during a 15-20 min period of irradiation and after the actinic radiation was turned off, i.e., in the recovery period. The pH values of chloroplast suspensions were 5.5, 6.5 and 8.0, the largest non-photochemical quenching was observed at pH of 6.5. The irradiation of chloroplasts led to an absorption decrease within the entire photosynthetically active range, attaining saturation when the fluorescence reached Fs level, and to an absorption increase during the recovery period. Absorbance changes at the maximum of red band were 10-20 %. A decrease in Chl concentration (10 %) after irradiation was found only at pH of 5.5, when the recovery time was the longest, i.e., about 60 min.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Non-photochemical quenching was largest at pH 6.5.

Organ / stage
chloroplastst0
Outcome
non-photochemical quenchinge0
Direction
largeste0
Setting
pH of 6.5e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“pea chloroplasts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–84 · show in text ↑
e0

“The pH values of chloroplast suspensions were 5.5, 6.5 and 8.0, the largest non-photochemical quenching was observed at pH of 6.5.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 707–837 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irradiation decreased chloroplast absorption across the photosynthetically active range.

Organ / stage
chloroplastst0
Treatment
irradiatione0
Outcome
absorptione0
Direction
decreasee0
Qualifier
entire photosynthetically active rangee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“pea chloroplasts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–84 · show in text ↑
e0

“The irradiation of chloroplasts led to an absorption decrease within the entire photosynthetically active range, attaining saturation when the fluorescence reached Fs level, and to an absorption increase during the recovery period.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 838–1069 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Absorption increased during the recovery period.

Outcome
absorptione0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
recovery periode0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“pea chloroplasts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–84 · show in text ↑
e0

“to an absorption increase during the recovery period.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1016–1069 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Red-band absorbance changes were 10–20%.

Outcome
Absorbance changese0
Value
10-20 %e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“pea chloroplasts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–84 · show in text ↑
e0

“Absorbance changes at the maximum of red band were 10-20 %.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1070–1129 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll concentration decreased 10% after irradiation at pH 5.5, where recovery took about 60 minutes.

Treatment
irradiatione0
Outcome
Chl concentratione0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
10 %e0
Qualifier
about 60 mine0
Setting
pH of 5.5e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“pea chloroplasts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–84 · show in text ↑
e0

“A decrease in Chl concentration (10 %) after irradiation was found only at pH of 5.5, when the recovery time was the longest, i.e., about 60 min.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1130–1275 · show in text ↑

radiation · molecular: metabolites · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 4 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

radiation · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.