Photosynthetic Rates

Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:50 am

Photosynthetic Rates

Post by duyh » Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:56 am

Hi everyone, I'm pretty confused with something regarding the rate of photosynthesis.

From my understanding, the rate of photosynthesis can either increase, decrease or stay constant if they're variables such as light intensity, temperature, etc affecting it.

There is also an optimum point where the rate will stop increasing and plateau if only one factor is affecting it such as light intensity.

So my question for everyone is, what happens to the photosynthetic rate over time if all other variables are held constant? I.e. the only thing changing is the amount of time. So for example measuring the amount of oxygen released at 5mins then measuring it again at 20mins.

I'm doing a biology lab and can't seem to grasp this concept. Would the rate just stay constant? Or does it actually decrease? I've been researching and can't seem to find any information on the photosynthetic rate over time

Links to any references such as peer reviewed journals would be appreciated thanks.

User avatar
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Post by mith » Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:11 am

Assume you're looking at a simple model where photo synthetic rate is ONLY dependent on light intensity. If light intensity doesn't change, how can you explain a change in photosynthetic rate?? Obviously, you cannot and therefore in this model, it is time invariant i.e. the photosynthetic rate does not change over time.

Expand the model to multiple input parameters--if none of the inputs change, your output doesn't change as well (same argument as above).

HOWEVER, a model is not the same as what is actually happening(unless you have a really complete model, in that case your model will probably be too complicated to work with). For example, the simple model I just described assumes the photosynthetic machinery does not change over time. Obviously that's not true. Chloroplasts can get damaged and growth occurs to name a few.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;

User avatar
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:12 pm

Post by JackBean » Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:14 am

do you keep also the level of CO2 and O2 the same? Like some small plant in big greenhouse?

Cis or trans? That's what matters.

User avatar
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Philomath, Oregon, USA

Post by jonmoulton » Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:25 pm

If all the relevant environmental parameters are held constant and assuming the environment is healthy for the plant, a plant moved from a somewhat different environment into that constant environment would be expected to adjust itself to the new environment and settle into a stable condition of steady-state photosynthesis. The change in the rate of photosynthesis over time would resemble a curve approaching an asymptote.

Plants optimize for light conditions by adjusting their biosynthetic investment into several systems. For instance, in low light conditions most (all, Jack?) plants will invest more new synthesis into light harvesting apparatus (photosystems, thylakoids, electron carriers) and less into carbon fixation apparatus (Calvin cycle enzymes). In higher light conditions there is not so much need to harvest a large fraction of the photon flux; instead, plants need to handle the high output of reduced NADPH from their photosystems so most plants will invest most new biosynthesis into their carbon fixation apparatus.

The tradeoff between light harvesting apparatus and carbon fixation apparatus is reflected in the changing photosynthesis versus irradiance curves (P vs. I) as plants adapt to new light conditions: in low light, plants adapt toward curves with steeper initial slopes and lower saturated photosynthetic rates while in high light, plants adapt toward curves with shallower initial slopes but high saturated photosynthetic rates (though photoinhibition in high light flux may prevent the plants from achieving those higher carbon fixation rates).

There are some big simplifications in this discussion and the sort of model I present is somewhat controversial. Modeling of P vs I response is a long-running and ongoing area of research.

User avatar
Posts: 438
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:43 pm
Location: ahmedabad, gujarat, India

Post by jwalin » Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:52 pm

yes very true...
opne very important thing to keep in mind is the time you have to give the plant to adjust. for everything to come into equilibrium.

everything seems to be covered...
just to add on...
1. the plants initial state also makes a difference if its a dying plant then the rate wont remain constant.
2. amount of water present... is another thing... aint very sure about it though... if the amoung of water is kept negligible... the photosynthesis will take place in spurts... rates may vary. water of metabolism will be used during that time...

for the 2. aint too sure.
it isn't what you do that matters but it is how you do it

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 16 guests