Skip to main content
Biophysical Journal logoLink to Biophysical Journal
. 1972 Jul;12(7):815–831. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(72)86125-3

A Connected Model of the Photosynthetic Unit

J Lavorel, P Joliot
PMCID: PMC1484262  PMID: 5037337

Abstract

The concept of photosynthetic unit (PSU) is reviewed in the light of the authors' results in the fields of fluorescence and luminescence (delayed light). Models of PSU are mainly distinguished by the amount of exciton exchange which is allowed between units. The “separate” model, with its “first-order” character, is not consistent with fluorescence kinetic data. The sigmoidal rise of fluorescence under actinic light is best explained by “nonseparate” models; however, most of these models assume a delocalization of excitons or centers. The “connected” model introduced here is not subject to this criticism. It discloses a new effect (the “îlot” effect): a nonrandom grouping of fluorescent units the consequences of which are discussed. It is noted that a “two-quantum” model for the photochemical reaction gives results very similar to those of the connected model. A relation between luminescence intensity and fluorescence yield is seen as a necessary consequence of the PSU concept. Its meaning is different in separate and nonseparate models. This relation is discussed in connection with the true system II fluorescence emission.

Full text

PDF
826

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. ARNOLD W., DAVIDSON J. B. The identity of the fluorescent and delayed light emission spectra in Chlorella. J Gen Physiol. 1954 May 20;37(5):677–684. doi: 10.1085/jgp.37.5.677. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Clayton R. K. An analysis of the relations between fluorescence and photochemistry during photosynthesis. J Theor Biol. 1967 Feb;14(2):173–186. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(67)90112-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. JOLIOT A., JOLIOT P. ETUDE CIN'ETIQUE DE LA R'EACTION PHOTOCHIMIQUE LIB'ERANT L'OXYG'ENE AU COURS DE LA PHOTOSYNTH'ESE. C R Hebd Seances Acad Sci. 1964 May 4;258:4622–4625. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. KAUTSKY H., APPEL W., AMANN H. [Chlorophyll fluorescence and carbon assimilation. Part XIII. The fluorescence and the photochemistry of plants]. Biochem Z. 1960;332:277–292. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. LAVOREL J. [Heterogeneity of chlorophyll in vivo. I. Spectra of fluorescence emission]. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1962 Jul 16;60:510–523. doi: 10.1016/0006-3002(62)90870-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Lavorel J. Induction of Fluorescence in Quinone Poisoned Chlorella Cells. Plant Physiol. 1959 May;34(3):204–209. doi: 10.1104/pp.34.3.204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Müller A., Lumry R., Walker M. S. Light-intensity dependence of the in vivo fluorescence lifetime of chlorophyll. Photochem Photobiol. 1969 Feb;9(2):113–126. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-1097.1969.tb05916.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Robinson G. W. Excitation transfer and trapping in photosynthesis. Brookhaven Symp Biol. 1966;19:16–48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Biophysical Journal are provided here courtesy of The Biophysical Society

RESOURCES