4.7 Article

Fine-tuning the photosynthetic light harvesting apparatus for improved photosynthetic efficiency and biomass yield

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-49545-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy (Consortium for Enhanced Camelina Oil) [DE-AR0000202]
  2. Bayer Crop Sciences
  3. Next-Generation Biogreen 21 Program (SSAC), Rural Development Administration [PJ013155012019]
  4. Basic Science Research Program of the National Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  5. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [NRF-2017R1A2A2A05001287]
  6. Financial Supporting Project of Long-term Overseas Dispatch of PNU's Tenure-track Faculty, 2016, Republic of Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Photosynthetic electron transport rates in higher plants and green algae are light-saturated at approximately one quarter of full sunlight intensity. This is due to the large optical cross section of plant light harvesting antenna complexes which capture photons at a rate nearly 10-fold faster than the rate-limiting step in electron transport. As a result, 75% of the light captured at full sunlight intensities is reradiated as heat or fluorescence. Previously, it has been demonstrated that reductions in the optical cross-section of the light-harvesting antenna can lead to substantial improvements in algal photosynthetic rates and biomass yield. By surveying a range of light harvesting antenna sizes achieved by reduction in chlorophyll b levels, we have determined that there is an optimal light-harvesting antenna size that results in the greatest whole plant photosynthetic performance. We also uncover a sharp transition point where further reductions or increases in antenna size reduce photosynthetic efficiency, tolerance to light stress, and impact thylakoid membrane architecture. Plants with optimized antenna sizes are shown to perform well not only in controlled greenhouse conditions, but also in the field achieving a 40% increase in biomass yield.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据