Photosynthesis: From Light to Biosphere 1995
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-0173-5_893
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chilling Sensitivity of Photosynthesis: Evidence for Differential Oxidative Stress in Two Lycopersicon Species of Different Chilling Tolerance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, in winter wheat an increased resistance to photo‐inhibition correlated with increased capacity to keep Q oxidized. Similarly in tomato, Q was more oxidized during low‐temperature stress in the more chilling‐tolerant wild tomato Lycopersicon peruvianum (Mill) (Brüggemann et al . 1995).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, in winter wheat an increased resistance to photo‐inhibition correlated with increased capacity to keep Q oxidized. Similarly in tomato, Q was more oxidized during low‐temperature stress in the more chilling‐tolerant wild tomato Lycopersicon peruvianum (Mill) (Brüggemann et al . 1995).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, high-altitude accessions of wild tomato species like Lycopersicon hirsutum, L. chilense and L. peruvianum show a higher level of chilling tolerance, as indicated by a greater post-chilling re-growth capacity, and less severe inhibition in photosynthesis than the cultivated tomato L. esculentum (Brüggemann and Linger, 1994;Jung and Steffen, 1997;Venema et al, 1999). The latter difference is attributed to the higher capacity of the Calvin cycle of wild tomato at suboptimal temperatures, resulting in a more oxidized state of Q A , the primary electron acceptor of PS II (Brüggemann et al, 1995). A recent study elucidated that tomato plants that develop at suboptimal temperatures typically become more tolerant to chill-induced photodamage and show a faster recovery (Venema et al, 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Similarly, Kicheva et al (1994) in wheat, Kanechi et al (1996) in coffee, and Panković et al (1999) in sunflower observed decreases of in vitro RuBPCO activity under DS. In principle, several factors may contribute to even further declines of RuBPCO activity in vivo through side effects of DS: stromal acidification (Berkowitz et al 1983), increase of stromal ionic strength (Kaiser 1982), or accumulating RuBPCO oxidation through over-excitation, which can play a role under long-term chilling stress (Brüggemann et al 1995). Limitation of RuBP regeneration by the decreased sFBP activity (Table 2) appears unlikely, since the latter enzyme activity still vastly exceeded the P N .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%