Library

Notes: We assessed whether growth of garden pea (Pisum sativum mutant Argenteum) was reduced under ecologically relevant enhancements of ultraviolet-B radiation (UV-B, 280–320 nm) by employing modulated field lampbanks which simulated 0, 16 or 24% ozone depiction. In addition, we determined whether enhanced UV-B altered the concentration and distribution of chlorophyll and UV-B-absorbing compounds in leaves, and whether this was dependent on leaf age. There were no significant UV-B effects on the four whole-plant parameters we examined (height, above-ground biomass, total leaflet area or average leaflet area). Of the 12 leaf-level parameters we examined, UV-B had a significant effect (P 〈 0.05) on only one parameter: the ratio of UV-B-absorbing compounds to chlorophyll, which was greatest at the highest UV-B level. Total chlorophyll concentrations tended to be lower under enhanced UV-B (P= 0.11), while the proportion of UV-B-absorbing compounds in the adaxial epidermis tended to be higher (P= 0.11). Total leaf concentrations of UV-B-absorbing compounds were unaffected by UV-B level. Cooler, suboptimal growing conditions during this late summer/early autumn experiment may have masked some potential UV-B effects. In contrast to the UV-B effects, we found strong leaf-age effects on nearly all parameters that we assessed. On an area basis, concentrations of total chlorophyll and UV-B-absorbing compounds increased with leaf age, while Chlorophyll a/b) ratios decreased. One of the few parameters unaffected by leaf age was the ratio of UV-B-absorbing compounds to total chlorophyll, which remained constant within a given UV-B treatment. Pea was much less sensitive to enhanced UV-B than in previous growth-chamber and greenhouse studies, and in nearly all cases UV-B treatment effects were overshadowed by leaf-age effects. In view of the large effect leaf age had on concentrations of UV-B-absorbing compounds, as well as their distribution within leaves, researchers may need to consider leaf age in UV-B experimental designs.

Notes: We examined how ultraviolet-B radiation (UV-B; 300 nm) screening effectiveness changes with leaf age in Rhododendron maximum growing in a shaded understory by measuring depth of penetration and epidermal transmittance with a fibre-optic microprobe. Depth of penetration (and epidermal transmittance) of UV-B decreased with leaf age in 1- to 4-year-old leaves, averaging 62 (32), 52 (22), 45 (16) and 48 μm (13%), respectively. Epidermal thickness increased with age in 1- to 4-year-old leaves due to a thickening of the cuticle from an average of 20 to 29μm. Ultraviolet-B-absorbing compound concentrations increased with age from 1–3 to 1–5 A300 cm−2 leaf area. Concentrations of UV-B-absorbing compounds (area basis) were a strong predictor of depth of penetration (r2= 0.82) and epidermal transmittance (r2= 0.95) of UV-B in mature (1–4 year-old) foliage. Chlorophyll concentrations (area basis) increased in leaves up to 3 years of age. Current-year leaves (30 d old) were exceptional in that while they were particularly effective at screening UV-B (depth of penetration and epidermal transmittance averaged 39μm and 5%, respectively) they had relatively low concentrations of UV-B-absorbing compounds (1.3 A300 cm−2). Our findings show that UV-B-screening effectiveness is not necessarily related to absorbing compound concentrations on a whole-leaf basis, possibly due to anatomical changes within the epidermis that occur with leaf age.

Notes: Abstract Along the west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula springtime ozone depletion events can lead to a two-fold increase in biologically effective UV-B radiation (UV-BBE) and summer air temperatures have risen ≈1.5°C during the past 50 years. We manipulated levels of UV radiation and temperature around Colobanthus quitensis (a cushion-forming plant, Caryophyllaceae) and Deschampsia antarctica (a tussock grass) along the Peninsula near Palmer Station for two field seasons. Ambient levels of UV were manipulated by placing filters that either transmitted UV (filter control), absorbed UV-B (reducing diurnal levels of UV-BBE by about 82%), or absorbed both UV-B and UV-A (reducing UV-BBE and UV-ABE by about 88 and 78%, respectively) on frames over naturally growing plants from November to March. Half the filters of each material completely surrounded the frames and raised diurnal and diel air temperatures around plants by an average of 2.3°C and 1.3°C, respectively. Reducing UV or warming had no effect on leaf concentrations of soluble UV-B absorbing compounds, UV-B absorbing surface waxes or chlorophylls. Warming had few effects on growth of either species over the first season. However, over the second field season warming improved growth of C. quitensis, leading to a 50% increase in leaf production (P 〈 0.10), a 26% increase in shoot production, and a 6% increase in foliar cover. In contrast, warming reduced growth of D. antarctica, leading to a 20% decline in leaf length, a 17% decline in leaf production (P 〈 0.10), and a 5% decline in foliar cover. Warming improved sexual reproduction in both species, primarily through faster development of reproductive structures and greater production of heavier seeds. Over the second field season, the percentage of reproductive structures that had reached the most developed (seed) stage in C. quitensis and D. antarctica was 20% and 15% higher, respectively, under warming. Capsules of C. quitensis produced 45% more seeds under warming and these seeds were 11% heavier. Growth of D. antarctica was improved when UV was reduced and these effects appeared to be cumulative over field seasons. Over the second season, tillers produced 55% more leaves and these leaves were 32% longer when UV-B was reduced. Tillers produced 137% more leaves that were 67% longer when both UV-B and UV-A were reduced. The effects of UV reduction were not as pronounced on C. quitensis, although over the second season cushions tended to be 17% larger and produce 21% more branches when UV-B was reduced, and tended to be 27% larger and produce 38% more branches when both UV-B and UV-A were reduced (P 〈 0.10). Few interactions were found between UV reduction and warming, although in the absence of warming, reducing UV led to slower development of reproductive structures in both species. The effects of warming and UV reduction were species specific and were often cumulative over the two field seasons, emphasizing the importance of long-term field manipulations in predicting the impacts of climate change.