Advertisement

Locomotion

  • Wolfgang Haupt
Chapter
  • 53 Downloads
Part of the Progress in Botany / Fortschritte der Botanik book series (BOTANY, volume 37)

Abstract

It has been pointed out several times that the term “photophobotaxis” should not be used because we are here dealing with responses which bear no relationship to the direction of incident light but which are the result of a sudden change of light intensity (c.f. Fortschr. Botan. 34, 228). Instead, “photophobic response” seems to be agreed upon, but there is still disagreement whether in addition the terms “positive” and “negative” photophobic response should be replaced by “inverse” and “direct” response (DIEHN) — these terms do not seem more selfevident than the old ones. In this review we will avoid both these alternatives; instead, as a preliminary means of understanding, the expressions “step-down” and “step-up” response will be used if the phobic response is induced by a decrease or by an increase in light intensity respectively.

Keywords

Action Spectrum Light Direction Euglena Gracilis Anabaena Variabilis Photosynthetic Electron Flow 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ADLER, J., TSO, W.-W.: Science 184, 1292–1294 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BENEDETTI, P.A., CHECCUCCI, A.: Plant Sci. Letters 4, 47–51 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BERG, H.C.: Nature 249, 77–79 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BIMPONG, CH.E., CLERK, G.G.: Ann. Bot. 34, 617–624 (1970).Google Scholar
  5. BROKAW, C.J. : J. Cell. Physiol. 83, 151–158 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BROWN, D.A., BERG, H.C.: Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. US 71, 1388–1392 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. CHECCUCCI, A., COLOMBETTI, G., FERRARA, R., LENCI, F.: Photochem. Photobiol., in press (1975).Google Scholar
  8. DIEHN, B.: Sciene 181, 1009–1015 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DIEHN, B., KINT, B.: Physiol. Chem. Phys. 2, 483–488 (1970).Google Scholar
  10. DRIFT, C. VAN DER, JONG, M.H. DE: Arch. Microbiol. 96, 83–92 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. FEINLEIB, M.E. : Photochem. Photobiol. 21, 351–354 (1975).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. FORWARD, R.B. : J. Protozool. 21, 312–315 (1974).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. FROEHLICH, O., DIEHN, B.: Nature 248, 802–804 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. (1).
    HADER, D.-P.: Arch. Mikrobiol. 96, 255–266 (1974);Google Scholar
  15. (2).
    Arch. Mikrobiol. 103, 169–174 (1975).Google Scholar
  16. HäDER, D.-P., NULTSCH, W.: Photochem. Photobiol. 18, 311–317 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. HAND, W.G., SCHMIDT, J.A.: J. Protozool., in press.Google Scholar
  18. HAUPT, W.: Progress in Photobiol. (Proceed. VI. Internat. Congr. Photobiol. Bochum, 1972 ) 026 (1974).Google Scholar
  19. JAENICKE, L.: Chemie in unserer Zeit 9, 50–58 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. (1).
    JAROSCH, R.: Protoplasma 57, 448–500 (1963);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. (2).
    Acta Protozool. 11, 23–37 (1972).Google Scholar
  22. KIVIC, P.A., VESK, M.: J. Exp. Bot. 23, 1070–1075 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. KONIJN, T.M.: Mycologia 63, 901–906 (1971).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. (1).
    LARSEN, S.H., ADLER, J., GARGUS, J.J., HOGG, R.W.: Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. US 71, 1239–1243 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. (2).
    Nature 249, 74–77 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MACHLIS, L.: Plant Physiol. 52, 527–530 (1973).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. MESIBOV, R., ORDAL, G.W., ADLER, J.: J. Gen. Physiol. 62, 203–223 (1973).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. (1).
    MüLLER, D.G.: Planta 81, 160–168 (1968);Google Scholar
  29. (2).
    Soc. Bot. Franc. Mémoires 1972, 87–88;Google Scholar
  30. (3).
    Naturwissenschaften 59, 166 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. (1).
    NULTSCH, W.: Photochem. Photobiol. 14, 705–712 (1971);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. (2).
    Abh. Marburger Gelehrten Gesellsch. 1972, 137–213 (1974).Google Scholar
  33. NULTSCH, W., HäDER, D.-P.: Ber. Deutsch. Botan. Ges. 87, 83–92 (1974).Google Scholar
  34. NULTSCH, W., HELLMANN, W.: Arch. Mikrobiol. 82, 76–90 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. NULTSCH, W., WENDEROTH, K.: Arch. Mikrobiol. 90, 47–58 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. PICCINNI, E., OMODEO, P.: Boll. Zool., in press (1975).Google Scholar
  37. SCHLETZ, K.: Z. Pflanzenphysiol., in press (1975).Google Scholar
  38. SILVERMAN, M., SIMON, M.: Nature 249, 73–74 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. SONG, P.-S., MOORE, TH.A.: Photochem. Photobiol. 19, 435–441 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. TSANG, N., MACNAB, R., KOSHLAND, D.E.: Science 181, 60–63 (1973).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. WATANABE, M., FURUYA, M.: Plant Cell Physiol. 15, 413–420 (1974).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Haupt
    • 1
  1. 1.Botanisches Institut der UniversitätErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations