Photosynthesis Research

, Volume 140, Issue 1, pp 51–63 | Cite as

Light-use efficiency and energy partitioning in rice is cultivar dependent

  • Gastón Quero
  • Victoria BonnecarrèreEmail author
  • Sebastián Fernández
  • Pedro Silva
  • Sebastián Simondi
  • Omar Borsani
Original Article


One of the main limitations of rice yield in regions of high productive performance is the light-use efficiency (LUE). LUE can be determined at the whole-plant level or at the photosynthetic apparatus level (quantum yield). Both vary according to the intensity and spectral quality of light. The aim of this study was to analyze the cultivar dependence regarding LUE at the plant level and quantum yield using four rice cultivars and four light environments. To achieve this, two in-house Light Systems were developed: Light System I which generates white light environments (spectral quality of 400–700 nm band) and Light System II which generates a blue-red light environment (spectral quality of 400–500 nm and 600–700 nm bands). Light environment conditioned the LUE and quantum yield in PSII of all evaluated cultivars. In white environments, LUE decreased when light intensity duplicated, while in blue-red environments no differences on LUE were observed. Energy partition in PSII was determined by the quantum yield of three de-excitation processes using chlorophyll fluorescence parameters. For this purpose, a quenching analysis followed by a relaxation analysis was performed. The damage of PSII was only increased by low levels of energy in white environments, leading to a decrease in photochemical processes due to the closure of the reaction centers. In conclusion, all rice cultivars evaluated in this study were sensible to low levels of radiation, but the response was cultivar dependent. There was not a clear genotypic relation between LUE and quantum yield.


Energy dissipation Quenching analyses Relaxation analyses Quantum yields 



We would like to acknowledge the Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación (ANII) which funded the Doctoral Scholarship of Gaston Quero (POS_NAC_2012_1_8560). This research was also funded by an INIA Project named “Desarrollo de una plataforma de fenotipado como base para la mejora de la tolerancia a estrés ambiental de cultivos y ajuste de modelos de simulación” (L4_10_1_AZ_BT_GT1_8850), and by Grupo Comisión Sectorial de Investigación Científica (CSIC I+D 418).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11120_2018_605_MOESM1_ESM.tif (23.1 mb)
Supplementary Figure S1 Experiment description. a. Diagram of growing shelf and distance between light source and last leaf. b. Scheme and distances of the spatial arrangement of pots. c. Photograph of the growing shelves. d. Photograph of the arrangement of pots and the size of plants. e. A closer look at the plant’s phenological state. f. Photograph of PAM data recording. (TIF 23612 KB)
11120_2018_605_MOESM2_ESM.tif (15 mb)
Supplementary Figure S2 Unit conversion of irradiance emitted by Light Systems. a. Maximum incident irradiance quantified as spectral energy flux using a spectroradiometer (USB2000+ spectrometer, Ocean Optics, Duiven, The Netherlands). b. Spectral energy flux for each hour of photoperiod. c. Irradiance quantified as energy flux for each hour of photoperiod. d. Unit conversion process of irradiance quantified as spectral energy flux (µW nm-1 cm-2) to irradiance quantified as energy flux (MJ m-2). e. Unit conversion process of irradiance quantified as spectral energy flux (µW nm-1 cm-2) to irradiance quantified as photon flux density (µmol photons m-2 s-1). E is the spectral energy flux, Ee is energy flux, PPFD is the photosynthetic photon flux density, λ is the specific wavelength. Δλ is λi – λi-1. h is the Planck constant (6.626 x 10-34 J s photon-1), c is the speed of light in the vacuum (3.00 x 108 m s-1), N is Avogadro’s number (6.626 x 1023 mol-1). (TIF 15313 KB)
11120_2018_605_MOESM3_ESM.tif (13.7 mb)
Supplementary Figure S3 Light spectrum of white actinic light. a. Spectral energy flux of saturating pulse (9200 µmol photons m-2 s-1) of white actinic light emitted by the pulse amplitude modulation Chl fluorometer (FMS1, Hansatech, King’s Lynn, UK). A black line indicates the spectral energy flux at 778 µmol photons m-2 s-1. b. Relation between photosynthetic photon flux density and FMS1 actinic light source steps. c. Relation between photosynthetic photon flux density and FMS1 saturating light source steps. E is the spectral energy flux; PPFD is the photosynthetic photon flux density. (TIF 13984 KB)


  1. Adams WW, Muller O, Cohu CM, Demmig-Adams B (2013) May photoinhibition be a consequence, rather than a cause, of limited plant productivity? Photosynth Res 117:31–44. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn TK, Avenson TJ, Peers G, Li Z, Dall’Osto L, Bassi R et al (2009) Investigating energy partitioning during photosynthesis using an expanded quantum yield convention. Chem Phys 357:151–158. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J (2012) World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  4. Allakhverdiev SI, Murata N (2004) Environmental stress inhibits the synthesis de novo of proteins involved in the photodamage-repair cycle of photosystem II in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. Biochim Biophys Acta 1657:23–32. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Allakhverdiev SI, Mohanty P, Murata N (2003) Dissection of photodamage at low temperature and repair in darkness suggests the existence of an intermediate form of photodamaged photosystem II. Biochemistry 421:14277–14283. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allakhverdiev SI, Tsvetkova N, Mohanty P, Szalontai B, Byoung YM, Debreczeny M, Murata N (2005) Irreversible photoinhibition of photosystem II is caused by exposure of Synechocystis cells to strong light for a prolonged period. Biochim Biophys Acta 1708:342–351. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Allakhverdiev SI, Los DA, Mohanty P, Nishiyama Y, Murata N (2007) Glycinebetaine alleviates the inhibitory effect of moderate heat stress on the repair of photosystem II during photoinhibition. Biochim Biophys Acta 1767:1363–1371. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker NR (2008) Chlorophyll fluorescence: a probe of photosynthesis in vivo. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:89–113. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berkovich YA, Konovalova IO, Smolyanina SO, Erokhin AN, Avercheva OV, Bassarskaya EM, Tarakanov IG (2017) LED crop illumination inside space greenhouses. Reach Rev Hum Sp Explor 6:11–24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brestic M, Zivcak M, Kunderlikova K, Allakhverdiev SI (2016) High temperature specifically affects the photoprotective responses of chlorophyll b-deficient wheat mutant lines. Photosynth Res 130:251–266. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brestic M, Zivcak M, Hauptvogel P, Misheva S, Kocheva K, Yang X, Allakhverdiev SI (2018) Wheat plant selection for high yields entailed improvement of leaf anatomical and biochemical traits including tolerance to non-optimal temperature conditions. Photosynth Res 136:245–255. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Campbell G, Norman J (1998) An introduction to environmental biophysics. Springer, New York. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Campbell DA, Tyystjärvi E (2012) Parameterization of photosystem II photoinactivation and repair. Biochim Biophys Acta 1817:258–265. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen C, Zhang D, Li P, Ma F (2012) Partitioning of absorbed light energy differed between the sun-exposed side and the shaded side of apple fruits under high light conditions. Plant Physiol Biochem 60:12–17. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Counce PA, Keisling TC, Mitchell J (2000) A uniform, objective and adaptive system for expressing rice development. Crop Sci 40:436–443. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dall’Osto L, Bressan M, Bassi R (2015) Biogenesis of light harvesting proteins. Biochim Biophys Acta 1847:861–871. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Demmig-Adams B, Adams WW III, Barker DH, Logan BA, Bowling DR, Verhoeven AS (1996) Using chlorophyll fluorescence to assess the fraction of absorbed light allocated to thermal dissipation of excess excitation. Physiol Plant 98:253–264. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Derks A, Schaven K, Bruce D (2015) Diverse mechanisms for photoprotection in photosynthesis. Dynamic regulation of photosystem II excitation in response to rapid environmental change. Biochim Biophys Acta 1847:468–485. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Devlin PF, Christie JM, Terry MJ (2007) Many hands make light work. J Exp Bot 58:3071–3077. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Einhorn KS, Rosenqvist E, Leverenz JW (2004) Photoinhibition in seedlings of Fraxinus and Fagus under natural light conditions: implications for forest regeneration? Oecologia 140:241–251. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Evans JR (1987) The relationship between electron transport components and photosynthetic capacity in pea leaves grown at different irradiances. Aust J Plant Physiol 14:157–170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Evans JR (1996) Developmental constrains on photosynthesis: effects of light and nutrition. In: Baker N (ed.) Photosynthesis and the environment. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 281–304. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Genty B, Briantais J, Baker NR (1989) The relationship between the quantum yield of photosynthetic electron transport and quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. Biochim Biophys Acta 990:87–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gitelson AA, Gamon JA (2015) The need for a common basis for defining light-use efficiency: implications for productivity estimation. Remote Sens Environ 156:196–201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goltsev VN, Kalaji HM, Paunov M, Bąba W, Horaczek T, Mojski J, Allakhverdiev SI (2016) Variable chlorophyll fluorescence and its use for assessing physiological condition of plant photosynthetic apparatus. Russ J Plant Physiol 63:869–893. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hakala M, Tuominen I. Keränen M, Tyystjärvi T, Tyystjärvi E (2005) Evidence for the role of the oxygen-evolving manganese complex in photoinhibition of photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta 1706:68–80. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hendrickson L, Furbank RT, Chow WS (2004) A simple alternative approach to assessing the fate of absorbed light energy using chlorophyll fluorescence. Photosynth Res 82:73–81. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Hendrickson L, Förster B, Pogson BJ, Wah SC (2005) A simple chlorophyll fluorescence parameter that correlates with the rate coefficient of photoinactivation of photosystem II. Photosynth Res 84:43–49. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hogewoning SW, Wientjes E, Douwstra P, Trouwborst G, van Ieperen W, Croce R, Harbinson J (2012) Photosynthetic quantum yield dynamics: from photosystems to leaves. Plant Cell 24:1921–1935. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Horie T, Sakuratani T (1985) Studies on crop-weather relationship model in rice. 1. Relation between absorbed solar radiation by the crop and dry matter production. J Agric Meteorol 40:331–342. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Horton P (2000) Prospects for crop improvement through the genetic manipulation of photosynthesis: morphological and biochemical aspects of light capture. J Exp Bot 51:475–485CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hubbart S, Peng S, Horton P, Chen Y, Murchie EH (2007) Trends in leaf photosynthesis in historical rice varieties developed in the Philippines since 1966. J Exp Bot 58:3429–3438. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ishida S, Morita KI, Kishine M, Takabayashi A, Murakami R, Takeda S et al (2011) Allocation of absorbed light energy in PSII to thermal dissipations in the presence or absence of PsbS subunits of rice. Plant Cell Physiol 52:1822–1831. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kalaji HM, Schansker G, Ladle RJ, Goltsev V et al (2014) Frequently asked questions about in vivo chlorophyll fluorescence: practical issues. Photosynth Res 122:121–158. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Kalaji HM, Schansker G, Brestic M, Bussotti F, Calatayud A, Ferroni L, Bąba W et al (2017) Frequently asked questions about chlorophyll fluorescence, the sequel. Photosynth Res 132:13–66. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kasajima I, Takahara K, Kawai-Yamada M, Uchimiya H (2009) Estimation of the relative sizes of rate constants for chlorophyll de-excitation processes through comparison of inverse fluorescence intensities. Plant Cell Physiol 50:1600–1616. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Keren N, Berg A, van Kan PJM, Levanon H, Ohad I (1997) Mechanism of photosystem II photoinactivation and D1 protein degradation at low light: the role of back electron flow. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:1579–1584. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Kitajima M, Butler WL (1975) Quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence and primary photochemistry in chloroplasts by dibromothymoquinone. Biochim Biophys Acta 376:105–115. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Klimov VV, Shafiev MA, Allakhverdiev SI (1990) Photoinactivation of the reactivation capacity of photosystem II in pea subchloroplast particles after a complete removal of manganese. Photosynth Res 23:59–65. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Klughammer C, Schreiber U (2008) Complementary PS II quantum yields calculated from simple fluorescence parameters measured by PAM fluorometry and the saturation pulse method. PAM Appl Notes 1:27–35Google Scholar
  41. Kozai T (2013) Resource use efficiency of closed plant production system with artificial light: concept, estimation and application to plant factory. Proc Jpn Acad Ser B 89:447–461. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kozai T, Kazuhiro F, Runkle ES (2016) LED Lighting for urban agriculture. Springer, New York. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kramer DM, Johnson G, Kiirats O, Edwards GE (2004) New fluorescence parameters for the determination of QA redox state and excitation energy fluxes. Photosynth Res 79:209–218. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Krause H, Jahns P (2003) Pulse amplitude modulated chlorophyll fluorometry and its application in plant science. In: Green B, Parson W (eds) Light-harvesting antennas, Kluwer Academic Publ, Dordrecht, pp 373–399. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Krause H, Jahns P (2004) Non-photochemical energy dissipation determined by chlorophyll fluorescence quenching: characterization and function. In: Papageorgiou GC, Govindjee (eds) Chlorophyll a fluorescence: a signature of photosynthesis. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 463–495. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Krause H, Weis E (1991) Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis: the basics. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 42:313–349. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Krause H, Gallé A, Virgo A, García M, Bucic P, Jahns P, Winter K (2006) High-light stress does not impair biomass accumulation of sun-acclimated tropical tree seedlings (Calophyllum longifolium Willd. and Tectona grandis L. f.). Plant Biol 8:31–41. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Lazár D (2015) Parameters of photosynthetic energy partitioning. J Plant Physiol 175:131–147. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Liu Z, Sun N (2013) Enhancing photosynthetic CO2 use efficiency in rice: approaches and challenges. Acta Physiol Plant 35:1001–1009. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Logan BA, Demmig-adams B, Adams W III, Bilger W (2014) Context, quantification, and measurement guide for non-photochemical quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. In: Demmig-Adams B et al (ed) Non-photochemical quenching and energy dissipation in plants, algae and cyanobacteria. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 187–201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Long SP, Zhu X, Naidu SL, Ort DR (2006) Can improvement in photosynthesis increase crop yields? Plant Cell Environ 29:315–330. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Matsuda R, Ohashi-kaneko K, Fujiwara K, Goto E, Kurata K (2004) Photosynthetic characteristics of rice leaves grown under red light with or without supplemental blue light. Plant Cell Physiol 45:1870–1874. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Matsuda R, Ohashi-Kaneko K, Fujiwara K, Kurata K (2008) Effects of blue light deficiency on acclimation of light energy partitioning in PSII and CO2 assimilation capacity to high irradiance in spinach leaves. Plant Cell Physiol 49:664–670. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Medlyn BE (1998) Physiological basis of the light use efficiency model. Tree Physiol 18:167–176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Mehta P, Allakhverdiev SI, Jajoo A (2010) Characterization of photosystem II heterogeneity in response to high salt stress in wheat leaves (Triticum aestivum). Photosynth Res 105:249–255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mitchell PL, Sheehy JE, Woodward FI (1998) Potential yields and the efficiency of radiation use in rice. IRRI 32:1–63Google Scholar
  57. Monteith JL (1972) Solar radiation and productivity in tropical ecosystems. J Appl Ecol 9:747–766. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Monteith J (1977) Climate and the efficiency of crop production in Britain. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 281:277–294. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Morrow RC (2008) LED lighting in horticulture. HortScience 43:1947–1950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Müh F, Glöckner C, Hellmich J, Zouni A (2012) Light-induced quinone reduction in photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta 1817:44–65. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Murata N, Nishiyama Y (2017) ATP is a driving force in the repair of photosystem II during photoinhibition. Plant Cell Environ 41:285–299. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Murata N, Takahashi S, Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI (2007) Photoinhibition of photosystem II under environmental stress. Biochim Biophys Acta 1767:414–421. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Murata N, Allakhverdiev SI, Nishiyama Y (2012) The mechanism of photoinhibition in vivo: re-evaluation of the roles of catalase, α-tocopherol, non-photochemical quenching, and electron transport. Biochim Biophys Acta 1817:1127–1133. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Murchie EH, Horton P (1997) Acclimation of photosynthesis to irradiance and spectral quality in British plant species: chlorophyll content, photosynthetic capacity and habitat preference. Plant Cell Environ 20:438–448. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 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. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Murchie EH, Chen Y, Hubbart S, Peng S, Horton P (1999) Interactions between senescence and leaf orientation determine in situ patterns of photosynthesis and photoinhibition in field grown rice 1. Plant Physiol 119:553–563. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Murchie EH, Hubbart S, Chen Y, Peng S, Horton P (2002) Acclimation of rice photosynthesis to irradiance under field conditions. Plant Physiol 130:1999–2010. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Nelson JA, Bugbee B (2014) Economic analysis of greenhouse lighting: light emitting diodes vs. high intensity discharge fixtures. PLoS ONE. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. Nelson JA, Bugbee B (2015) Analysis of environmental effects on leaf temperature under sunlight, high pressure sodium and light emitting diodes. PLoS ONE 10:1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Nelson M, Dempster WF, Silverstone S, Alling A, Allen JP, Van Thillo M (2005) Crop yield and light/energy efficiency in a closed ecological system: laboratory biosphere experiments with wheat and sweet potato. Adv Sp Res 35:1539–1543. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI, Murata N (2006) A new paradigm for the action of reactive oxygen species in the photoinhibition of photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta 1757:742–749. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI, Murata N (2011) Protein synthesis is the primary target of reactive oxygen species in the photoinhibition of photosystem II. Physiol Plant 142:35–46. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Nobel PS (2009) Physicochemical and environmental plant physiology. Academic Press, Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Oxborough K, Baker NR (1997) Resolving chlorophyll a fluorescence of photosynthetic efficiency into photochemical components—calculation of qP and Fv/Fm without measuring Fo. Photosynth Res 54:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. The R Foundation. Accessed 5 June 2018
  76. Russell L (2018) emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.2.1.
  77. Šetlík I, Allakhverdiev SI, Nedbal L, Šetlíková E, Klimov VV (1990) Three types of photosystem II photoinactivation-I. Damaging processes on the acceptor side. Photosynth Res 23:39–48. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Sinclair TR, Horie T (1989) Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, and crop radiation use efficiency: a review. Crop Sci 29:90–98. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sinclair TR, Muchow RC (1999) Radiation use efficiency. Adv Agron 65:215–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Skillman JB (2008) Quantum yield variation across the three pathways of photosynthesis: not yet out of the dark. J Exp Bot 59:1647–1661. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Su N, Wu Q, Shen Z, Xia K, Cui J (2014) Effects of light quality on the chloroplastic ultrastructure and photosynthetic characteristics of cucumber seedlings. Plant Growth Regul 73:227–235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Takahashi S, Murata N (2005) Interruption of the Calvin cycle inhibits the repair of photosystem II from photodamage. Biochim Biophys Acta 1708:352–361. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Terashima I, Fujita T, Inoue T, Chow WS, Oguchi R (2009) Green light drives leaf photosynthesis more efficiently than red light in strong white light: revisiting the enigmatic question of why leaves are green. Plant Cell Physiol 50:684–697. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tikkanen M, Aro EM (2012) Thylakoid protein phosphorylation in dynamic regulation of photosystem II in higher plants. Biochim Biophys Acta 1817:232–238. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Tikkanen M, Mekala NR, Aro EM (2014) Photosystem II photoinhibition-repair cycle protects Photosystem i from irreversible damage. Biochim Biophys Acta 1837:210–215. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Wagner R, Dietzel L, Bräutigam K, Fischer W, Pfannschmidt T (2008) The long-term response to fluctuating light quality is an important and distinct light acclimation mechanism that supports survival of Arabidopsis thaliana under low light conditions. Planta 228:573–587. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Walters RG, Horton P (1995) Acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to the light environment: changes in photosynthetic function. Planta 197:306–312. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Wang H, Gu M, Cui J, Shi K, Zhou Y, Yu J (2009) Effects of light quality on CO2 assimilation, chlorophyll-fluorescence quenching, expression of Calvin cycle genes and carbohydrate accumulation in Cucumis sativus. J Photochem Photobiol B Biol 96:30–37. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Ware MA, Belgio E, Ruban AV (2015) Photoprotective capacity of non-photochemical quenching in plants acclimated to different light intensities. Photosynth Res 126:261–274. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Yamazaki JY (2010) Is light quality involved in the regulation of the photosynthetic apparatus in attached rice leaves? Photosynth Res 105:63–71. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Yamazaki JY, Kamimura Y, Okada M, Sugimura Y (1999) Changes in photosynthetic characteristics and photosystem stoichiometries in the lower leaves in rice seedlings. Plant Sci 148:155–163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Yin X, Struik PC (2017) Can increased leaf photosynthesis be converted into higher crop mass production? A simulation study for rice using the crop model GECROS. J Exp Bot 68:2345–2360. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  93. Yoshida S, Forno D, Cock JH, Gomez KA (1976) Laboratory manual for physiological studies of rice, (3rd edn). International Rice Research Institute, Los BañosGoogle Scholar
  94. Zhu XG, Long SP, Ort DR (2008) What is the maximum efficiency with which photosynthesis can convert solar energy into biomass? Curr Opin Biotechnol 19:153–159. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Zivcak M, Brestic M, Kalaji HM. Govindjee (2014) Photosynthetic responses of sun- and shade-grown barley leaves to high light: is the lower PSII connectivity in shade leaves associated with protection against excess of light? Photosynth Res 119:339–354. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  96. Zivcak M, Brestic M, Kunderlikova K, Sytar O, Allakhverdiev SI (2015) Repetitive light pulse-induced photoinhibition of photosystem I severely affects CO2 assimilation and photoprotection in wheat leaves. Photosynth Res 126:449–463. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Zivcak M, Brestic M, Botyanszka L, Chen YE, Allakhverdiev SI (2018) Phenotyping of isogenic chlorophyll-less bread and durum wheat mutant lines in relation to photoprotection and photosynthetic capacity. Photosynth Res 0:1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Biología Vegetal, Facultad de AgronomíaUniversidad de la RepúblicaMontevideoUruguay
  2. 2.Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA)Unidad de Biotecnología. Estación Experimental Wilson Ferreira AldunateCanelonesUruguay
  3. 3.Instituto de Ingeniería Eléctrica, Facultad de IngenieríaUniversidad de la RepúblicaMontevideoUruguay
  4. 4.Area de Matemática, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y NaturalesUniversidad Nacional de Cuyo (FCEN-UNCuyo)MendozaArgentina

Personalised recommendations