Paper · 1992 · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY

Effect of Cold Hardening on Sensitivity of Winter and Spring Wheat Leaves to Short-Term Photoinhibition and Recovery of Photosynthesis

Vaughan M. Hurry; Norman P. A. Huner

14
claims
29
verbatim quotes
123
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Photoinhibition of photosynthesis and its recovery were studied in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) leaves grown at nonhardening (20 degrees C) and cold-hardening (5 degrees C) temperatures. Cold-hardened wheat leaves were less susceptible to photoinhibition at 5 degrees C than nonhardened leaves, and the winter cultivars, Kharkov and Monopol, were less susceptible than the spring cultivar, Glenlea. The presence of chloramphenicol, a chloroplastic protein synthesis inhibitor, increased the susceptibility to photoinhibition, but cold-hardened leaves still remained less susceptible to photoinhibition than nonhardened leaves. Recovery at 50 mumol m(-2) s(-1) photosynthetic photon flux density and 20 degrees C was at least biphasic, with a fast and a slow phase in all cultivars. Cold-hardened leaves recovered maximum fluorescence and maximum variable fluorescence in the dark-adapted state during the fast phase at a rate of 42% h(-1) compared with 22% h(-1) for nonhardened leaves. The slow phase occurred at similar rates (2% h(-1)) in cold-hardened and nonhardened leaves. Full recovery required up to 30 h. Fast-recovery phase was not reduced by either lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C or by the presence of chloramphenicol. Slow-recovery phase was inhibited by both treatments. Hence, the fast phase of recovery does not require de novo chloroplast protein synthesis. In addition, only approximately 60% of the photochemical efficiency lost through photoinhibition at 5 degrees C was associated with lost [(14)C]atrazine binding and, hence, with damage to the secondary quinone electron acceptor for photosystem II-binding site. We conclude that the decrease in susceptibility to photoinhibition exhibited following cold hardening of winter and spring cultivars is not due to an increased capacity for repair of photoinhibitory damage at 5 degrees C but reflects intrinsic properties of the cold-hardened photosynthetic apparatus. A model to account for the fast component of recovery is discussed.

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 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cold-hardened wheat leaves were less susceptible to photoinhibition at 5 degrees C than nonhardened leaves.

Treatment
Cold-hardenede0
Outcome
susceptible to photoinhibitione0
Direction
less susceptiblee0
Qualifier
5 degrees Ce0
Comparator
nonhardened leavese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cold-hardened wheat leaves were less susceptible to photoinhibition at 5 degrees C than nonhardened leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 187–293 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The winter cultivars Kharkov and Monopol were less susceptible to photoinhibition than the spring cultivar Glenlea.

Material
winter cultivars, Kharkov and Monopole0
Outcome
less susceptiblee0
Direction
less susceptiblee0
Comparator
spring cultivar, Glenleae0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“the winter cultivars, Kharkov and Monopol, were less susceptible than the spring cultivar, Glenlea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 299–397 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chloramphenicol increased the susceptibility of wheat leaves to photoinhibition.

Treatment
chloramphenicole0
Outcome
susceptibility to photoinhibitione0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“The presence of chloramphenicol, a chloroplastic protein synthesis inhibitor, increased the susceptibility to photoinhibition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 399–524 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Even in the presence of chloramphenicol, cold-hardened leaves remained less susceptible to photoinhibition than nonhardened leaves.

Treatment
cold-hardenede0
Outcome
susceptible to photoinhibitione0
Direction
less susceptiblee0
Qualifier
The presence of chloramphenicole0
Comparator
nonhardened leavese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“The presence of chloramphenicol, a chloroplastic protein synthesis inhibitor, increased the susceptibility to photoinhibition, but cold-hardened leaves still remained less susceptible to photoinhibition than nonhardened leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 399–625 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Recovery of wheat leaves from photoinhibition was at least biphasic, with a fast and a slow phase in all cultivars.

Outcome
at least biphasice0
Qualifier
a fast and a slow phase in all cultivarse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Recovery at 50 mumol m(-2) s(-1) photosynthetic photon flux density and 20 degrees C was at least biphasic, with a fast and a slow phase in all cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 627–780 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

During the fast recovery phase, cold-hardened leaves recovered maximum fluorescence and maximum variable fluorescence at 42% h(-1), compared with 22% h(-1) for nonhardened leaves.

Treatment
Cold-hardenede0
Outcome
recovered maximum fluorescence and maximum variable fluorescencee0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
42% h(-1)e0
Qualifier
22% h(-1)e0
Comparator
nonhardened leavese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Cold-hardened leaves recovered maximum fluorescence and maximum variable fluorescence in the dark-adapted state during the fast phase at a rate of 42% h(-1) compared with 22% h(-1) for nonhardened leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 782–985 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The slow recovery phase occurred at similar rates (2% h(-1)) in cold-hardened and nonhardened leaves.

Treatment
cold-hardenede0
Outcome
The slow phasee0
Direction
similare0
Value
2% h(-1)e0
Comparator
nonhardened leavese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“The slow phase occurred at similar rates (2% h(-1)) in cold-hardened and nonhardened leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 987–1078 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The fast recovery phase was not reduced by lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C.

Treatment
lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees Ce0
Outcome
Fast-recovery phasee0
Direction
not reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Fast-recovery phase was not reduced by either lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C or by the presence of chloramphenicol”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1115–1247 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The fast recovery phase was not reduced by the presence of chloramphenicol.

Treatment
the presence of chloramphenicole0
Outcome
Fast-recovery phasee0
Direction
not reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Fast-recovery phase was not reduced by either lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C or by the presence of chloramphenicol”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1115–1247 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The slow recovery phase was inhibited by lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C.

Treatment
lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees Ce1
Outcome
Slow-recovery phasee0
Direction
inhibitede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Slow-recovery phase was inhibited by both treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1249–1301 · show in text ↑
e1

“lowering the recovery temperature to 5 degrees C”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1209 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The slow recovery phase was inhibited by the presence of chloramphenicol.

Treatment
the presence of chloramphenicole1
Outcome
Slow-recovery phasee0
Direction
inhibitede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“Slow-recovery phase was inhibited by both treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1249–1301 · show in text ↑
e1

“the presence of chloramphenicol”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1216–1247 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The fast phase of recovery does not require de novo chloroplast protein synthesis.

Outcome
fast phase of recoverye0
Qualifier
does not require de novo chloroplast protein synthesise0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“the fast phase of recovery does not require de novo chloroplast protein synthesis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1310–1391 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Only approximately 60% of the photochemical efficiency lost through photoinhibition at 5 degrees C was associated with lost atrazine binding at the secondary quinone electron acceptor site of photosystem II.

Compound
[(14)C]atrazinee0
Outcome
photochemical efficiency lost through photoinhibitione0
Value
approximately 60%e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“only approximately 60% of the photochemical efficiency lost through photoinhibition at 5 degrees C was associated with lost [(14)C]atrazine binding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1406–1553 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that the lower photoinhibition susceptibility after cold hardening of winter and spring cultivars is not due to increased repair capacity at 5 degrees C but reflects intrinsic properties of the cold-hardened photosynthetic apparatus.

Treatment
cold hardeninge0
Outcome
decrease in susceptibility to photoinhibitione0
Qualifier
reflects intrinsic properties of the cold-hardened photosynthetic apparatuse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–66 · show in text ↑
e0

“the decrease in susceptibility to photoinhibition exhibited following cold hardening of winter and spring cultivars is not due to an increased capacity for repair of photoinhibitory damage at 5 degrees C but reflects intrinsic properties of the cold-hardened photosynthetic apparatus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1671–1954 · show in text ↑

cold · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

27 papers: 11 positive, 16 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 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.