Photosynthesis Research

, Volume 88, Issue 3, pp 311–322 | Cite as

Exposure to ultraviolet radiation delays photosynthetic recovery in Arctic kelp zoospores

  • Michael Y. Roleda
  • Dieter Hanelt
  • Christian Wiencke


Seasonal reproduction in some Arctic Laminariales coincides with increased UV-B radiation due to stratospheric ozone depletion and relatively high water temperatures during polar spring. To find out the capacity to cope with different spectral irradiance, the kinetics of photosynthetic recovery was investigated in zoospores of four Arctic species of the order Laminariales, the kelps Saccorhiza dermatodea, Alaria esculenta, Laminaria digitata, and Laminaria saccharina. The physiology of light harvesting, changes in photosynthetic efficiency and kinetics of photosynthetic recovery were measured by in vivo fluorescence changes of Photosystem II (PSII). Saturation irradiance of freshly released spores showed minimal I k values (photon fluence rate where initial slope intersects horizontal asymptote of the curve) values ranging from 13 to 18 µmol photons m−2 s−1 among species collected at different depths, confirming that spores are low-light adapted. Exposure to different radiation spectra consisting of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR; 400–700 nm), PAR+UV-A radiation (UV-A; 320–400 nm), and PAR+ UV-A+UV-B radiation (UV-B; 280–320 nm) showed that the cumulative effects of increasing PAR fluence and the additional effect of UV-A and UV-B radiations on photoinhibition of photosynthesis are species specific. After long exposures, Laminaria saccharina was more sensitive to the different light treatments than the other three species investigated. Kinetics of recovery in zoospores showed a fast phase in S. dermatodea, which indicates a reduction of the photoprotective process while a slow phase in L. saccharina indicates recovery from severe photodamage. This first attempt to study photoinhibition and kinetics of recovery in zoospores showed that zoospores are the stage in the life history of seaweeds most susceptible to light stress and that ultraviolet radiation (UVR) effectively delays photosynthetic recovery. The viability of spores is important on the recruitment of the gametophytic and sporophytic life stages. The impact of UVR on the zoospores is related to the vertical depth distribution of the large sporophytes in the field.


Alaria esculenta Kinetics Laminaria digitata Laminaria saccharina Optimum quantum yield P-I curve Photosynthetic recovery Saccorhiza dermatodea 



photosynthetically active radiation (=P)










saturating irradiance


photosynthetic efficiency


maximum relative electron transport rate


Photosystem II


maximum potential quantum yield of PSII

P–I curve

photosynthesis-irradiance curve

tan h

hyperbolic tangent


photon flux rate


cyclobutane-pyrimidine dimers


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



We thank A. Gruber for technical help, the diving team of Spitsbergen 2004 field campaign especially M.␣Schwanitz for collecting fertile plant material and the Ny- Ålesund International Arctic Environmental Research and Monitoring Facility for support.


  1. Adams III WW, Demming-Adams B (1992) Operation of xanthophyll cycle in higher plants in response to diurnal changes in incident sunlight. Planta 186:390–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amsler CD, Neushul M (1989) Diel periodicity of spore release from kelp Nereocystis luetkeana (Mertens) Postels et Ruprecht. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 134:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amsler CD, Neushul M (1991) Photosynthetic physiology and chemical composition of spores of the kelps Macrocystis pyrifera, Nereocystis luetkeana, Laminaria farlowii, and Pterygophora californica (Phaeophyceae). J Phycol 27:26–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson B, Salter AH, Virgin I, Vass I, Styring S (1992) Photodamage to Photosystem II- primary and secondary events. J Photochem Photobiol B: Biol 15: 15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aro EM, Virgin I, Andersson B (1993) Photoinhibition of photosystem II: inactivation, protein damage and turnover. Biochim Biophys Acta 1143:113–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baroli I, Melis A (1998) Photoinhibitory damage is modulated by the rate of photosynthesis and by the photosystem II light-harvesting chlorophyll antenna size. Planta 295:288–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergo E, Segalla A, Giacometti GM, Tarantino D, Soave C, Andreucci F, Barbato R (2003) Role of visible light in the recovery of photosystem II structure and function from ultraviolet-B stress in higher plants. J Exp Bot 54:1665–1673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bischof K, Hanelt D, Tüg H, Karsten U, Brouwer PEM, Wiencke C (1998) Acclimation of brown algal photosynthesis to ultraviolet radiation in Arctic coastal waters (Spitsbergen, Norway). Polar Biol 20:388–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bischof K, Kräbs G, Wiencke C, Hanelt D (2002) Solar ultraviolet radiation affects the activity of ribulose-1,5-biphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase and the composition of photosynthetic and xanthophyll cycle pigments in the intertidal green alga Ulva lactuca L. Planta 215:502–509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chalker BE, Dunlap WC, Oliver JK (1983) Bathymetric adaptations of reef-building corals at Davies Reef, Great Barrier Reef, Australia. II. Light saturation curves for photosynthesis and respiration. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 73:37–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapman ARO (1984) Reproduction, recruitment and mortality in two species of Laminaria in southwest Nova Scotia. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 78:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coon DA, Neushul M, Charters AC (1972) The settling behaviour of marine algal spores. In: Nisizawa K (ed) Proceedings 7th International Seaweed Symposium, University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, pp 237–242Google Scholar
  13. Cordi B, Donkin ME, Peloquin J, Price DN, Depledge MH (2001) The influence of UV-B radiation on the reproductive cells of the intertidal macroalga, Enteromorpha intestinalis. Aquat Toxicol 56:1–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deysher L , Norton TA (1982) Dispersal and colonization in Sargassum muticum (Yendo) Fensholt. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 56:179–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dring MJ, Makarov V, Schoschina E, Lorenz M, Lüning K (1996) Influence of ultraviolet-radiation on chlorophyll fluorescence and growth in different life-history stages of three species of Laminaria (Phaeophyta). Mar Biol 126:183–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Franklin LA, Larkum AWD (1997) Multiple strategies for a high light existence in a tropical marine macroalga. Photosyn Res 53:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Franklin LA, Osmond CB, Larkum AWD (2003) Photoinhibition, UV-B and algal photosynthesis. In: Larkum AW, Douglas SE, Raven JA (eds) Photosynthesis in Algae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, pp 351–384Google Scholar
  18. Gathen P von der, Rex M, Harris NRP, Lucic D, Knudsen BM, Braathen GO, De Backer H, Fabian R, Fast H, Gil M, Kyrö E, Mikkelsen IS, Rummukainen M, Stähelin J, Varotsos C (1995) Observational evidence for chemical ozone depletion over the Arctic in winter 1991–92. Nature 375:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gordon R, Brawley SH (2004) Effects of water motion on propagule release from algae with complex life histories. Mar Biol 145:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grzymski J, Johnsen G, Sakshaug E (1997) The significance of intracellular self-shading on the biooptical properties of brown, red, and green macroalgae. J Phycol 33:408–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grzymski J, Orrico C, Schofield OM (2001) Monochromatic ultraviolet light induced damage to Photosystem II efficiency and carbon fixation in the marine diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana (3H). Photosynth Res 68:181–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hakala M, Tuominen I, Keranen M, Tyystjarvi T, Tyystjarvi E (2005) Evidence for the role of the oxygen-evolving manganese complex in photoinhibition of photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta 1706:68–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanelt D (1998) Capability of dynamic photoinhibition in Arctic macroalgae is related to their depth distribution. Mar Biol 131:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanelt D, Huppertz K, Nultsch W (1992) Photoinhibition of photosynthesis and its recovery in red algae. Bot Acta 105:278–284Google Scholar
  25. Hanelt D, Wiencke C, Karsten U, Nultsch W (1997) Photoinhibition and recovery after high light stress in different developmental and life-history stages of Laminaria saccharina (Phaeophyta). J␣Phycol 33:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanelt D, Tüg GH, Bischof K, Groß C, Lippert H, Sawall T, Wiencke C (2001) Light regime in an Arctic fjord: a study related to stratospheric ozone depletion as a basis for determination of UV effects on algal growth. Mar Biol 138:649–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hanelt D, Wiencke C, Bischof K (2003) Photosynthesis in marine macrolage. In: Larkum AW, Douglas SE, Raven JA (eds) Photosynthesis in Algae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, pp 413–435Google Scholar
  28. Henry EC, Cole KM (1982) Ultrastructure of swarmers in the Laminariales (Phaeophyceae), I. Zoospores. J Phycol 18:550–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jassby AD, Platt T (1976) Mathematical formulation of the relationship between photosynthesis and light for phytoplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 21:540–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Joska MAP, Bolton JJ (1987) In situ measurement of zoospore release and seasonality of reproduction in Ecklonia maxima (Alariaceae, Laminariales). Br Phycol J 22:209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kessler JO (1985) Hydrodynamic focusing of motile algal cells. Nature 313:218–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lüning K (1990) Seaweeds. Their environment, biogeography and ecophysiology. Wiley-Interscience, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Melis A (1999) Photosystem-II damage and repair cycle in chloroplasts: what modulates the rate of photodamage in vivo? Trends Plant Sci 4:130–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI, Yamamoto H, Hayashi H, Murata N (2004) Singlet oxygen inhibits the repair of photosystem II by suppressing the translation elongation of the D1 protein in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. Biochemistry 43:11321–11330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI, Murata N (2005) Inhibition of the repair of photosystem II by oxidative stress in cyanobacteria. Photosyn Res 84:1–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Norton TA (1992) Dispersal by macroalgae. Br Phycol J 27:293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Norton TA, Fetter R (1981) The settlement of Sargassum muticum propagules in stationary and flowing water. J Mar Biol Ass UK 61:929–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ohnishi N, Allakhverdiev SI, Takahashi S, Higashi S, Watanabe M, Nishiyama Y, Murata N (2005) Two-step mechanism of photodamage to photosystem II: step 1 occurs at the oxygen-evolving complex and step 2 occurs at the photochemical reaction center. Biochemistry 44:8494–8499PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Öquist G, Chow WS (1992) On the relationship between the quantum yield of Photosystem II electron transport, as determined by chlorophyll fluorescence, and the quantum yield of CO2-dependent O2 evolution. Photosynth Res 33:51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Osmond CB (1994) What is photoinhibition? Some insights from comparisons of shade and sun plant. In: Baker NR, Bowyer JR (eds) Photoinhibition of photosynthesis, from the molecular mechanisms to the field. BIOS Scientific Publ., Oxford, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  41. Purcell EM (1977) Life at low Reynolds number. Am J Phys 45:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richter M, Rühle W, Wild A (1990) Studies on the mechanism of Photosystem II photoinhibition I. A two-step degradation of D1-protein. Photosynth Res 24:229–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robberecht R, Caldwell MM (1983) Protective mechanisms and acclimation to solar ultraviolet-B radiation in Oenothera stricta. Plant Cell Environ 6:477–485Google Scholar
  44. Roleda MY, van de Poll WH, Hanelt D, Wiencke C (2004) PAR and UVBR effects on photosynthesis, viability, growth and DNA in different life stages of two coexisting Gigartinales: implications for recruitment and zonation pattern. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 281:37–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roleda MY, Wiencke C, Hanelt D, van de Poll WH, Gruber A (2005) Sensitivity of Laminariales zoospores from Helgoland (North Sea) to ultraviolet and photosynthetically active radiation: implications for depth distribution and seasonal reproduction. Plant Cell Environ 28:466–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Setlow RB (1974) The wavelengths in sunlight effective in producing skin cancer: a theoretical analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 71:3363–3366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stähelin J, Harris NRP, Appenzeller C, Eberhard J (2001) Ozone trends: a review. Rev Geophy 39:231–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Turcsányi E, Vass I (2002) Effect of UV-A radiation on photosynthetic electron transport. Acta Biol Szeged 46:171–173Google Scholar
  49. Vass I (1997) Adverse effects of UV-B light on the structure and function of the photosynthetic apparatus. In: Pessarakli M (eds) Handbook of photosynthesis. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp␣931–949Google Scholar
  50. Weykam G, Gómez I, Wiencke C, Iken K, Klöser H (1996) Photosynthetic characteristics and C:N ratios of macroalgae from King George Island (Antarctica). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 204:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wiencke C, Rahmel J, Karsten U, Weykam G, Kirst GO (1993) Photosynthesis of marine macroalgae from Antarctica: light and temperature requirements. Bot Acta 106:78–87Google Scholar
  52. Wiencke C, Gómez I, Pakker H, Flores-Moya A, Altamirano M, Hanelt D, Bischof K, Figueroa FL (2000) Impact of UV radiation on viability, photosynthetic characteristics and DNA of brown algal zoospores: implications for depth zonation. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 197:217–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wiencke C, Clayton MN, Schoenwaelder M (2004) Sensitivity and acclimation to UV radiation of zoospores from five species of Laminariales from the Arctic. Mar Biol 145:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiencke C, Roleda MY, Gruber A, Clayton MN, Bischof K (2006) Susceptibility of zoospores to UV radiation determines upper depth distribution limit of Arctic kelps: evidence through field experiments. J Ecol 94:455–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yakandawala N, Lupi C, Bilang R, Potrykus I (2003) Lincomycin treatment: a simple method to differentiate primary and processed transcripts in rice (Oryza sativa L.) chloroplast. Plant Mol Biol Rep 21:241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Y. Roleda
    • 1
  • Dieter Hanelt
    • 2
  • Christian Wiencke
    • 3
  1. 1.Biologische Anstalt Helgoland, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine ResearchMarine StationHelgolandGermany
  2. 2.Biozentrum Klein Flottbek University of HamburgHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine ResearchBremerhavenGermany

Personalised recommendations