Oecologia
9 Springer-Verlag1986
Oecologia (Berlin) (1986) 69:517-523
Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rainforest species
I. Induction under constant and fluctuating light conditions*
Robin L. Chazdon** and Robert W. Pearcy
Department of Botany, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Summary. Photosynthetic induction under constant and
fluctuating light conditions was investigated in intact leaves
of Alocasia macrorrhiza and Toona australis, two species
native to Australian rainforests. When leaves were exposed
to saturating light following a long period at low light intensity, an induction period of 25-40 rain was required before
steady-state photosynthesis was achieved. A long induction
period was required regardless of plant growth conditions
(high vs. low light) and ambient CO2 concentrations during
mesurement. In low-light grown A. macrorrhiza, the initial
slope of the relationship between assimilation and internal
CO2 pressure increased 7-fold from 30 s following illumination to the end of the induction period. Both stomatal and
carboxylation limitations play a role in photosynthetic induction, but carboxylation limitations predominate during
the first 6-10 min. In both species, leaf induction state increased 2 to 3-fold during a sequence of five 30- or 60-s
lightflecks separated by 2 min of low light. Rates of induction during 60-s lightflecks and during constant illumination were similar. Induction loss in low-light grown leaves
of Alocasia macrorrhiza required more than 60 rain of continuous exposure to low light conditions. These results suggest that, under forest understory conditions, leaves are
at intermediate induction states for most of the day. The
ability to utilize sunflecks may therefore be strongly influenced by the ability of leaves to maintain relatively high
states of induction during long periods of low light.
Light conditions in forest understory habitats are highly
variable. The low levels of diffuse light incident during most
of the day can be punctuated by sunflecks that may increase
photon flux density (PFD) by over two orders of magnitude
within a few seconds. Although they may occur at any one
spot for only a small fraction of the day, sunflecks can
contribute 50 to 80% of total daily PFD in evergreen tropical forest understory habitats (Bj6rkman and Ludlow 1972;
Pearcy 1983; Chazdon and Fetcher 1984). Measurements
of photosynthesis in these environments similarly show that
a large fraction of the total daily carbon gain can be attributed to sunfleck periods (Bj6rkman et al. 1972; Pearcy
* Supported by National Science Foundation Grant BSR
8217071 and USDA Grant 85-CRCR-l-1620
** Current address and offprint requests to." Department of Botany,
University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
and Calkin 1983; Chazdon 1986). Although steady-state
photosynthetic light responses have been reported for a
number of tropical species, little attention has focused on
photosynthetic responses to the rapidly fluctuating light
conditions typical of sunfleck periods. Under these conditions, analyses of transient photosynthetic responses are required to investigate the determinants of leaf carbon gain
(Gross and Chabot 1979; Gross 1982; Pearcy et al. 1985).
It has long been known that, when a leaf is exposed
to saturating light intensities following a long period of
darkness or low light, maximum photosynthetic rates are
achieved only after an induction period ranging from minutes to several hours (Osterhout and Haas 1917; Rabinowitch 1956). The induction requirement for maximum photosynthetic rates is an intrinsic feature of photosynthesis
and has been widely demonstrated in intact leaves, algae,
protoplasts, and isolated chloroplasts (Edwards and Walker
1983). Although the processes that occur during induction
are poorly understood, there is good evidence that induction is primarily associated with reactions of the photosynthetic carbon reduction cycle, rather than with photochemical reactions (Edwards and Walker 1983). However, beyond
this fundamental observation, it is difficult to separate the
relative importance of stomatal limitations, substrate concentrations, and enzyme activation during induction in intact leaves. Moreover, little is known about the potential
significance of the induction requirement to light utilization
during sunfleck periods.
In this study, we have determined the time-course of
induction in two contrasting species with the objective of
investigating how induction influences the utilization of
sunflecks; Alocasia macrorrhiza (L.) G. Don (Araceae) is
an understory herb, and Toona australis (F. Muell.) Harms
(Meliaceae) is a canopy tree. Both species commonly occur
in humid tropical and subtropical forests of Queensland,
Australia. Field measurements with A. maerorrhiza in a
shaded understory have shown that about 40% of the daily
CO2 uptake occurred during a few brief sunflecks (Bj6rkman et al. 1972). In contrast, T. australis is a fast-growing
gap species that regenerates under open conditions and
hence may depend less on sunflecks for carbon gain (G.
Stocker, pers. comm). The time-course of photosynthetic
induction was studied under conditions of constant light
and fluctuating light. We also describe the time-course of
induction loss in A. macrorrhiza and examine the role of
stomatal limitations during induction in A. macrorrhiza.
Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during simulated
518
sunflecks as influenced by induction are discussed elsewhere
(Chazdon and Pearcy 1986).
M a t e r i a l s and methods
Seeds of A. macrorrhiza and T. australis were collected in
a rainforest area near Atherton, Queensland (Lat. 16 ~ S,
alt. 760 m). After germination, the plants were grown in
a glasshouse under conditions described elsewhere (Pearcy
et al. 1982). Low light growth conditions were created with
a shadecloth enclosure within the glasshouse (8% transmittance). At least 6 months following growth under these conditions, measurements of COz exchange were made on single attached leaves in an open-circuit gas exchange apparatus described elsewhere (Pearcy et al. 1985). All measurements were made on young, fully-expanded leaves and were
replicated 3-6 times with different leaves. A. macrorrhiza
were grown under both high and low light conditions,
whereas T. australis were grown only under high light in
the glasshouse.
Induction responses were measured as described by
Pearcy et al. (1985). In the experiments described here, the
shutter was controlled directly from a Commodore model 8032 microcomputer, which was also connected to a
Hewlett Packard model 3497 data acquisition system. A
15 W incandescent bulb located above the leaf chamber provided background low light throughout all induction and
lightfleck experiments. Raw data were stored on floppy
disks during data acquisition and rates of COz and water
vapor exchange were computed later. During measurements
under constant light, the signals from the COz analyzer,
humidity sensor, and leaf thermocouples were logged at
5-s intervals for the first 10 to 20 min and subsequently
at 5- to 30-s intervals. Except as noted below, all measurements were made using a reference CO2 pressure of
360 gbar. Leaves used in induction measurements were not
exposed to PFD above 10 g m o l m -2 s -1 for at least 2 h
previous to measurement.
During measurements of induction under fluctuating
light, signals from the CO2 analyzer, humidity sensor, and
leaf thermocouple were recorded every 1.3 s. Leaves were
exposed to a series of 5 lightfiecks separated by 2 rain of
low light. Within an experiment, lightflecks were either 30
or 60 s long. Leaf induction state after each lightfleck was
determined as follows:
Induction state ( % ) - PLF-- - PL • l o o
Pn-- PL
(1)
where Per is the measured CO2 assimilation rate at the
end of the lightfleck, and PL and Pn are the steady-state
CO2 assimilation rates at low and high light levels, respectively. Background low and lightfleck PFD were 10 and
500 I.tmol m -2 s -~ and 15-20 and 1,200 lamol m -z s -~, for
A. macrorrhiza and T. australis, respectively. Lightfleck
P F D were above light saturation as determined from
steady-state light response curves for both species, but did
not result in photoinhibition, even during exposures of
1-2 h. Low-light P F D were just above the light compensation points of both species. Induction measurements during
fluctuating light were made at a flow rate through the
chamber and analyzer of 3.5-4.0 1 min -~ to minimize lags
due to the analyzer response. To further minimize instrumentation lags, all electronic filtering in the analyzer circuits was switched off. Under these conditions, the total
response time of the analyzer and tubing was reduced to
4.3 s. Rates of CO2 uptake were corrected for instrumentation lags due to volume of the chamber as described by
Pearcy et al. (1985).
To determine the relative importance of stomatal and
non stomatal limitations during induction in low-light
grown A. macrorrhiza, the time-course of photosynthesis
and stomatal conductance in one leaf were determined
under 6 different ambient CO2 pressures ranging from 130
to 1,284 gbar. Measurements were made at flow rates of
0.6-0.7 1 min -~. The induction response followed a light
increase from 12 to 400 lamol m -2 s -1. Based on data derived from these time-courses, the relationship between CO2
assimilation (A) and intercellular CO2 pressure (Ci) was
determined at various times during the induction. These
"transient" A/Ci curves were then used to calculate stomatal limitation as described by Farquhar and Sharkey (1982).
Non-stomatal carboxylation limitations were calculated at
the same elapsed times as follows:
~ .
Carboxylation 9limitation-
P(Ci)eq-P(fl)t
....
x 1
,00
(2)
P(Ci)eq
w h e r e Ci is the intercellular CO2 pressure at each time peri-
od, and e(ci)eq and P(Ci)t .... are the CO2 assimilation rates
at this Ci during equilibrium and transient conditions, respectively. This limitation is a measure of the relative difference between transient assimilation rates and steady-state
assimilation rates at the same Ci, and therefore represents
limitations due to reactions of the photosynthetic carbon
reduction cycle rather than those that directly affect diffusion of CO2. It should be noted that stomatal limitations
are calculated on an absolute basis (infinite stomatal conductance), while carboxylation limitations are calculated
relative to a minimal steady-state value. Furthermore, these
limitations are not additive because of the non-linearity of
photosynthetic responses to CO2 (Sharkey 1985).
The time-course of induction loss in A. macrorrhiza was
determined by exposing fully-induced leaves to periods of
low light ( 1 0 g m o l m -z s -1) ranging from 2 to 60rain.
After exposures to low light, leaves were given a 30-s exposure to high light (500 gmol m 2 s- 1). Leaf induction state
following low light periods was determined using equation
1, based on the CO2 assimilation rate reached after 30 s
of illumination.
Results
Time-course of induction under constant light
When leaves were exposed to saturating light following a
long period at low light, an induction period of 26 to 48 min
was required before steady-state photosynthesis rates were
reached. The time-course of induction did not differ significantly between high- and low-light grown A. macrorrhiza,
or between A. macrorrhiza and T. australis (Table 1). Eight
to 12 min were required to reach 50% of the steady-state
rates (Table 1). In low-light grown A. macrorrhiza leaves,
induction appeared to occur in two distinct phases, an initial rapid phase followed by a slow, gradual rise to the
steady-state rate (Fig. 1 A). In contrast, T. australis did not
exhibit an initial rapid phase (Fig. 2A). In both species,
increases in stomatal conductance often lagged behind increases in CO2 assimilation, but once stomatal conductance
began to increase, the time-course of photosynthesis and
519
Table 1. Time (min) required to reach 50%, 90% and 100% of
steady-state assimilation rates (~tmol CO2 m -2 s -1) of leaves of
A. macrorrhiza and T. australis. Measurements were made at ambient CO2 pressures of 355-360 pbar. Values are means+ 1 standard
deviation
Species/
Trt
n
50%
90%
100%
(min)
(min)
(min)
A
~E
12
Steady-state
rate
(~tmol COz
m 2 s- 1)
I
0
I
I
I
200
A. macrorrhiza
Low-light
4
High-light 4
8.9_+1.7 21.8+1.5
10.1___2.5 27.4_+5.0
34.7_+2.8 4.8_+1.4
42.0+6.0 16.7_+1.7
150
E
-~
7". australis
High-light
6
11.8+3.9
21.8_+4.8
29.2-+5.7
12.3+2.8
E
100
50
~1
0
7r
6
A
~176176176176176176
~~176
~176176
7
E
3
4
300
i
i
i
.I
250
Ij,,f,f""
E
.~
350
..t: 200
-_ 150
O
2
100
o
4
I
I
I
50
]
I
125
7r
?
lOO
E
75
E
E
50
400
B
./f"
~176176176176176176176176176
~176
~176176176176
i
I
800
i
1200
1gO0
2000
Time, seconds
Fig. 2 A-C. Time course of A assimilation, B stomatal conductance
(g), and C intercellular CO2 pressure (Ci) during photosynthetic
induction of a high-light grown leaf of Toona australis. The arrow
indicates when light was increased from 20 to 1,200 ~tmol m - 2 s- 1
25
i
0
I
I
350
300
mg~
i
Table 2. Time (min) required to reach 50%, 90% and 100% of
steady-state photosynthesis rates (~tmol CO2 m -2 s-x) during inC
duction of a leaf of Alocasia macrorrhiza at different ambient CO2
pressures
~ -~176176176176176176176176176176
"*~176
~176176
"~176
I
I
i
250
200
O-
tjIl
~ ~ ~ B,e
50%
90%
100%
Steady-state Rate
pressure
(~tbar)
(rain)
(min)
(min)
(~tmolCO2 m-2 s-1)
130
200
640
844
1,284
1.1
5.3
4.6
5.9
2.0
19.0
23.2
14.7
13.3
11.7
43.5
45.2
28.6
34.3
26.3
1.1
2.0
6.0
5.8
7.5
Ambient
150
CO 2
100
50
0
i
400
I
800
12100
16i00
2000
Time, seconds
Fig. 1 A-C. Time course of A assimilation, B stomatal conductance
(g), and C intercellular CO2 pressure (Ci) during photosynthetic
induction of a low-light grown leaf of Alocasia macrorrhiza. The
arrow indicates when light was increased from 10 to 400 ktmol m - 2
S-1
conductance a p p e a r e d nearly coincident (Figs. 1 A, B and
2A, B). Intercellular CO2 pressure showed an initial d r o p
upon illumination and then remained relatively stable during the induction period (Fig. I C and 2C). In general, Ci
remained above 200 labar t h r o u g h o u t the entire period.
Stomatal limitation during induction
In A. macrorrhiza, a long induction period was required
at ambient CO2 pressures as high as 1,284 p b a r (Table 2).
The long induction requirement at these high CO2 pressures
cannot be explained by diffusion limitations, and must
therefore reflect decreases in carboxylation limitations during the induction period. A t ambient CO2 pressures below
200 labar, CO2 assimilation increased slowly and continuously with time. However, at ambient CO2 pressures
above 200 ~tbar, the increase in assimilation rate with time
appeared biphasic, with an early rapid phase followed by
a slow, sigmoidal phase (Fig. 1 A), The biphasic nature o f
the induction became more p r o n o u n c e d at the highest CO2
pressures.
The relationship between CO2 assimilation and Ci at
different time periods following illumination showed an increase in assimilation rate at a given C~ over time (Fig. 3).
520
10
9
T
E
8
?
E
o
E
steady state
-----e~' 960 s
/e~e~e....~'*
6
o
4
E
"~
E
s
ago s
e//~,
,
, ~
)
.
I
I
I
I
250
500
750
1000
?
E
Intercellular C02 pressure, p,bor
Fig. 3. The relationship between assimilation and intercellular C O 2
pressure (C~) at five time periods during photosynthetic induction
and at steady-state of a low-light grown leaf of Alocasia macrorrhiza. At each time period, points represent assimilation and C~
values measured at different ambient CO2 pressures
.
E
E
+
.o[
,I
+oL
. I
400
0o-
5
J~
?
4
,3
o
E
::::L
g
2
o
9---
1
~
o
9.
~"
,f
"~+~
9
,
."
:
:
I
9
i
l
i..~.:.~
....
~,.a;
~.'.
~,H~.
~~,-,~'"
O0
9
1'
T
P
I
0
,
l
,
,
I
I
,
200
400
I
I
400
500
9
200
1O0
0
i
0
Time,
I
600
,
I
200
I
400
Time,
10
JD
:r
.
I
600
I
800
1000
seconds
Fig. 5A-C. Time course of A assimilation, B stomatal conductance
(g), and C intercellular CO2 pressure (C+) during a series of five
60-s lightflecks of a high-light grown leaf of Toona australis. The
arrows indicate times of light increases and decreases. Two min
of low light separate each lightfleck
40
20
.
t-[
20o._t-T,
=
t
?
E
E
.
.
50
30
.
100
'
E
''
1oo[
o
E
""
:.
-1
o60s
v
7ca
I
T.,~
.E
=
2
0
,
l
o
~120 s
a
0
!
240 s
/
o
'
5
-6
I
800
i
1000
seconds
Fig, 4A-C. Time course of A assimilation, B stomatal conductance
(g), and C intercellular CO2 pressure (C+) during a series of five
60-s lightflecks of a low-light grown leaf of AIocasia macrorrhiza.
The arrows indicate times of light increases and decreases. Two
min of low light separate each lightfleck
Because of irregularities in the biphasic nature of the responses, individual data points exhibited some scatter but
the time dependent increase in the initial slopes of the relationship between CO2 assimilation rate and Ci is clearly
evident. The initial slope increased approximately 7-fold
from 30 s following the light increase to the end of the
induction period. At 30 s, CO2 uptake at a Ci of 300 Ixbar
was 0.8 ~tmol CO2 m -2 s -1 compared to 4.2 lamol CO2
m - 2 s-1 at equilibrium (Fig. 3). These curves suggest that
most of the initial lag in photosynthesis can be explained
by carboxylation limitations.
Analyses of stomatal and carboxylation limitations of
photosynthesis indicated that both components are involved in the induction process, but carboxylation limitations predominate for the first 6-10 min following illumination. Stomatal limitations increased later during induction,
but still represented only a small part of the overall limitation on photosynthetic rate. At an ambient CO2 pressure
of 360 ktbar, stomatal limitation was only 8% at 30 s,
whereas carboxylation limitations were 82% (relative to 0
at equilibrium). Stomatal limitation increased to 22% 1 min
after illumination and remained between 23-32% during
the entire induction period, whereas carboxylation limitations decreased throughout the induction period.
Induction under fluctuating light
During a sequence of lightflecks, rates of CO2 assimilation
and stomatal conductance increased in both species
(Figs. 4A, B and 5A, B). Following a sequence of five 60-s
lightflecks (total elapsed time of 13 min), leaves of low-light
grown A. macrorrhiza had reached 75% of their steady-state
CO2 assimilation rate, whereas leaves of T. austral& had
reached 52% of their steady-state assimilation rate (Table 3). The time-course of induction during 30-s lightflecks
521
1 O0
Table 3. Relative induction state (% full induction) of leaves of
A. macrorrhiza and T. australis during a sequence of five 30- and
\
60-s light flecks at saturating light intensity. Flecks were separated
by 2 min of low light. Values are means_+SD for 3-4 leaves.
Fleck
length
(s)
Fleck #
60
Induction State (%)
A. macrorrhiza T. australis
Elapsed
time
(min)
1
2
3
4
5
39.5__+23.0
49.1_+28.5
57.5_+29.1
65.1_+30.5
74.8_+27.2
14.3__+ 7.4
23.9__+10.2
34.8__+11.5
44.0_+13.7
52.3_+14.4
1
4
7
t0
13
1
2
3
4
5
23.7+ 6.2
31.2_+ 5.4
36.2+ 5.4
41.5_____ 4.1
48.3-+ 3.0
10.3_+ 9.8
15.9+13.9
21.0__+15.3
25.8_+15.3
31.0_+15.1
0.5
3.0
5.5
8.0
10.5
Q.
0
g
30
was relatively slower in both species; after 5 lightflecks (total elapsed time of 10.5 min), leaves of A. macrorrhiza and
T. australis reached 48 and 31% of their respective steadystate rates (Table 3). At any given time period during the
lightfleck sequence, the degree of induction was greater in
leaves exposed to 60-s lightflecks (Table 3).
Within both species, leaves varied widely in their responses to the first lightleck, and therefore to subsequent
lightflecks. Coefficients of variation for percent full induction during the first 60-s lightfleck were 58% and 52%
in A. macrorrhiza and T. australis, respectively. Although
the rate of induction did not differ significantly between
species (Student's t-test on arcsine-transformed data; P >
0.05), these data suggest that leaves of A. macrorrhiza
reached higher levels of induction during the first lightfleck,
and maintained these higher levels throughout the sequence
(Table 3).
Stomatal responses to lightflecks were consistently more
rapid in T. australis than in A. macrorrhiza (Figs. 4 B and
5 B). However, CO2 assimilation rates were also higher in
T. australis, and the resulting Ci during lightfleck sequences
were similar in the two species (Figs. 4 C and 5 C). During
lightfleck sequences, Ci remained above 200 labar, as during
induction under constant light (Figs. 1 C, 2C, 3 C, and 4C).
In T. australis, there appeared to be two components to
the stomatal response: a rapid one that corresponded to
the light increases and decreases during individual lightflecks, and a slow one that corresponded to the apparent
increase in induction state.
Within each species, the rate of induction during the
60-s lightfleck sequences was not substantially different
from the rate of induction during constant illumination
(Figs. 1 A and 2A). Because different sets of leaves were
used and sample sizes were small, it is difficult to make
meaningful quantitative comparisons between these two experiments. Nevertheless, the data clearly indicate that sunflecks, if they are not too brief and infrequent, may be
as effective as constant illumination in promoting photosynthetic induction.
Time-course o f induction loss & low light
In leaves of low-light grown A. macrorrhiza, complete induction loss required over 60 min of exposure to low-light
"0
C
40
20
0
210
r
0
610 ' '
I
180
Low-light period, minutes
Fig. 6. The time-course of induction loss of low-light grown leaves
of Alocasia macrorrhiza following different periods of exposure
to low light
conditions (Fig. 6). The loss of induction in low light followed a negative exponential function; the half-time for
induction loss was approximately 25 min (Fig. 6). After
60 min at low light, leaves dropped to 43 % relative induction. When these leaves were initially exposed to a 30-s
lightfleck following more than 3 h of exposure to low light,
the CO2 assimilation rate was 20% of the difference between the steady-state low-light and high-light rates (Fig. 6,
Table 3). Although the full time course of induction loss
in T. austral& was not investigated, after 2 min of low light,
relative induction dropped to 89,5%, and responses to subsequent lightflecks further decreased (Chazdon and Pearcy
1986). Based on these observations, it appears that induction loss in high-light grown T. austral& occurs more rapidly than in low-light grown A. macrorrhiza.
Discussion
Photosynthetic induction in intact leaves is a complex phenomenon potentially involving both stomatal and carboxylation limitations to photosynthetic rate. The data presented
here suggest that, during induction, increases in carboxylation capacity rather than stomatal conductance are primarily responsible for the increasing photosynthetic rate.
Similar results were obtained with leaves of two Hawaiian
understory species (Pearcy et al. 1985). One possible problem with this interpretation, however, is that a cuticular
conductance to water vapor but not to CO2 could result
in an overestimation of the intercellular CO2 pressures and
hence an underestimation of the stomatal limitations. The
effect of a cuticular conductance would be greatest at the
low stomatal conductances present early in induction.
The mechanistic basis of the induction requirement of
photosynthesis is poorly understood, but it probably involves requirements for autocatalytic buildup of sufficient
pools of carbon reduction cycle metabolites and/or light
activation of photosynthetic enzymes (Walker 1980). Several photosynthetic enzymes, including ribulose-l,5-bisphosphate carboxylase (RUBISCO) are known to be light activated. Moreover, under steady-state conditions there is a
strong linear relationship between RUBISCO activity and
the initial slope of the CO2 dependence curve of assimilation (von Caemmerer and Farquhar 1981). The mechanistic
522
basis for the increasing slope of the transient A/Ci curves
during induction may be the light activation requirement
of RUBISCO (Fig. 3). However, a role for activation of
other enzymes, or for metabolite pool size changes cannot
be ruled out.
The apparently nearly constant intercellular COz pressures after the initial drop during induction suggests that
stomatal opening may somehow be closely coupled to the
increasing photosynthetic capacity during induction. Further evidence of the close correlation between stomatal conductance and photosynthesis under transient conditions is
shown by the relative constancy of the calculated stomatal
limitation throughout the induction period. A close correlation between stomatal conductance and steady-state photosynthetic rate has been observed for a variety of plants
(Wong et al. 1979, Korner et al. 1979, Schulze and Hall
1982), but little attention has been given to correlated responses under transient conditions.
Stomatal opening and induction in a C4 tree species
was much faster than in a C3 tree species, even though
carboxylation limitations predominated during induction
in both species (Pearcy et al. 1985). Slow stomatal responses
to sunflecks of some tree species have been suggested as
a possible basis for species differences in shade tolerance
(Woods and Turner 1971). However, measurements of A.
macrorrhiza in its native habitat indicate that stomatal conductances are probably sufficiently high that they would
impose only a small limitation on photosynthesis during
sunflecks (Bj6rkman et al. 1972).
The increase in COz assimilation rate during fluctuating
light conditions clearly shows that constant light is not required for induction (Figs. 4 and 5), which had been previously demonstrated for leaves of other forest species
(Pearcy et al. 1985). Thus, the occurrence of a lightfleck
appears to prime the leaf, through its effect on induction,
such that the leaf is better able to utilize subsequent lightflecks. The greater rate of induction during 60-s lightflecks
compared to 30-s lightflecks suggests that induction is sensitive to lightfleck length (Table 3) with the total exposure
time, rather than the total number of photons received,
probably being the significant factor. The time-course of
induction in wheat leaves was relatively independent of light
intensity (McAlister 1937).
The loss of induction in low-light grown leaves of A.
macrorrhiza was considerably slower than the rate of induction under both constant and fluctuating light. Deactivation
of RUBISCO in wheat seedlings was also found to be considerably slower than activation (Perchorowicz et al. 1982).
Also, changes in ribulose-l,5-bisphosphate (RuBP) pool
sizes in Xanthium strumarium leaves following a decrease
in light were consistent with a relatively slow deactivation
of RUBISCO (Mott et al. 1984).
Leaves of A. macrorrhiza consistently exhibited a faster
initial rate of induction than leaves of T. australis under
both constant and fluctuating light conditions (Figs. 1A,
2A, 4A, and 5A). This difference may reflect species-specific differences in requirements for activation of photosynthetic enzymes, or in metabolite pool sizes. The slower rate
of induction loss in A. macrorrhiza also suggests that this
species is able to maintain RUBISCO (or other carbon reduction cycle enzymes) in a more activated state and/or
maintain larger pool sizes of carbon reduction cycle intermediates under low-light conditions. These differences in
induction responses should result in more efficient utiliza-
tion of sunflecks by A. macrorrhiza than by T. australis
(Chazdon and Pearcy 1986).
In a Hawaiian forest understory, sunflecks are clustered
in their temporal distribution with periods of relatively frequent sunflecks interspersed with periods with few or no
sunflecks. Most sunflecks in this forest occurred within
2 min of another sunfleck (Pearcy and Calkin 1983). Similar
patterns have been observed in other temperate and tropical
forests, including those where A. macrorrhiza is common
(Bj6rkman et al. 1972) Thus, the occurrence of a sunfleck
is a good predictor that another will occur within a short
time. A rapid induction response coupled with a slow rate
of deactivation may serve to insure that sunflecks are efficiently utilized.
The data presented here, along with measurements of
light in tropical and subtropical forests (Bj6rkman and
Ludlow 1972, Pearcy and Calkin 1983, Chazdon 1986), suggest that, in the understory, leaf induction state may significantly limit the capacity of a leaf to utilize a sunfleck. Exposure to several, short sunflecks is sufficient to stimulate
partial induction following a long period of darkness or
low light. Yet leaves are rarely exposed to sufficiently long
periods of high light to maintain a fully-induced photosynthetic apparatus for very long. Consequently, steady-state
photosynthesis rates may poorly reflect actual rates of photosynthesis during sunfleck periods. Studies of leaf carbon
gain in understory species will therefore need to incorporate
transient photosynthetic responses at intermediate induction states.
References
Bj6rkman O, Ludlow MM (1972) Characterization of the light
climate on the floor of a Queensland rainforest. Carnegie Inst
Washington Year Book 71:85-94
Bj6rkman O, Ludlow MM, Morrow PA (1972) Photosynthetic performance of two rainforest species in their native habitat and
analysis of their gas exchange. Carnegie Inst Washington Year
Book 71:94-102
Chazdon RL (1986) Light variation and carbon gain in rain forest
understory palms. J Ecology (in press)
Chazdon RL, Fetcher N (1984) Photosynthetic light environments
in a lowland tropical rain forest of Costa Rica. J Ecol
72 : 553-564
Chazdon RL, Pearcy RW (1986) Photosynthetic responses to light
variation in rainforest species. II. Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during lightflecks. Oecologia (Berlin)
69:524-531
Edwards G, Walker D (1983) Ca, C4: mechanisms, and cellular
and environmental regulation, of photosynthesis. Univ of Calif
Press, Berkeley. p542
Farquhar GD, Sharkey TD (1982) Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 33:317-345
Gross LJ (1982) Photosynthetic dynamics in varying light environments: a model and its application to whole leaf carbon gain.
Ecology 63 : 84-93
Gross LJ, Chabot BF (1979) Time course of photosynthetic response to changes in incident light energy. Plant Physiol
63 : 1033-1038
Korner CH, Scheel JA, Bauer H (1979) Maximum leaf diffusive
conductance in vascular plants. Photosynthetica 13:45-82
McAlister ED (1937) Time course of photosynthesis for a higher
plant. Smithson Misc Coll 95:24
Mott KA, Jensen RG, O'Leary JW, and Berry JA (1984) Photosynthesis and ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate concentrations in intact
leaves of Xanthium strumarium L. Plant Physiol 76: 968-971
523
Osterhout WJV, Haas RC (1919) On the dynamics of photosynthesis. J. Gen Physiol 1 : 1-16
Pearcy RW (1983) The light environment and growth of C3 and
C4 tree species in the understory of a Hawaiian forest. Oecologia (Berlin) 58 : 1%25
Pearcy RW, Calkin H (1983) Carbon dioxide exchange of C3 and
C4 tree species in the understory of a Hawaiian forest. Oecologia (Berlin) 58:26-32
Pearcy RF, Osteryoung K, Randall D (1982) Carbon dioxide exchange characteristics of C4 Hawaiian Euphorbia species native
to diverse habitats. Oecologia (Berlin) 55:333-341
Pearcy RW, Osteryoung K, Calkin HW (1985) Photosynthetic responses to dynamic light environments by Hawaiian trees. The
time course of C02 uptake and carbon gain during sunflecks.
Plant Physiol 79 : 896-902
Perchorowitz JT, Raynes DA, Jensen RG (1981) Light limitation
of photosynthesis and activation of ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase in wheat seedlings. Proc Natl Acad Sci 78 : 2985-2989
Rabinowitch EI (1956) Photosynthesis and related processes.
Vol. II Part 2. Interscience publishers. New York
Schulze E-D, Hall AE (1982) Stomatal responses, water loss and
CO2 assimilation rates of plants in contrasting environments.
In: OL Lange, PS Nobel, CB Osmond, H Ziegler (eds) Physiological Plant Ecology II. vol. 12B. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, NS pp 181-230
Sharkey TD (1985) Photosynthesis in intact leaves of C3 plants:
physics, physiology and rate limitations. Botanical Review
51 : 54-105
Von Caemmerer S, Farquhar GD (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange
of leaves. Planta 153 : 376-387
Walker DA (1981) Photosynthetic induction. In: Akoyonoglou G
(ed) Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on Photosynthesis. Vol. IV Balaban Int. Sci. Series, Philadelphia pp 189202
Wong SC, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD (1979) Stomatal conductance
correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282:42~426
Woods DB, Turner NC (1971) Stomatal response to changing light
by four species of varying shade tolerance. New Phytol
70: 7 2 8 4
Received November 30, 1985