2), the non-relaxed fraction of quantum yield after 30 min in dark (q i) was 0.30 ± 0.04 in the sun leaves and 0.39 ± 0.07 in the shade leaves. Increase

of relative variable fluorescence at 2 ms (V J) indicates stronger limitation of KU-60019 electron transport from QA to QB as shown also numerically by the values of probability (ψET2o) of trapped PSII electron transfer from reduced QA to QB (Table 4). The variable Chl fluorescence increase from I to P represents the measure of electron transport from QB beyond PSI (Munday and Govindjee 1969; Schansker et al. 2003). As is evident by the values of the probability with which the electron moves toward H 89 solubility dmso PSI end acceptors, ψRE1o, the electron transport between PSII and PSI after HL treatment becomes selleck screening library less limited (Table 4), especially in shade leaves. (For a detailed discussion on the interpretation of the J–I–P rise (the so-called thermal phase of fast ChlF kinetics), see a review by Stirbet and Govindjee 2012). Another explanation for the above results is that HL treatment affects the post-illumination redox state of the PQ pool, and the activation state of the PS I acceptor side (e.g., due to FNR activity) probably does not decay within the 30-min dark period that was used before the measurements. Stromal

components can donate electrons to the PQ pool in the dark. Reduction in the dark can be substantially stimulated by pre-illumination with strong light (Asada et al. 1992). An increase of PQ-pool reduction with respect to the control will induce an increase of the J-step (Toth et al. 2007) and, hence, of all the parameters based on the values of V J. This

is also supported by increased values of F 0 in samples 30 min after HL treatment. The changes of connectivity parameters (p 2G, p, ω) after HL treatment were mostly insignificant (Table 4); moreover, according to Laisk and Oja (2013), estimates of p parameter can be strongly influenced by the redox status of the PQ pool. Since F 0 value may increase in samples after HL treatment, calculated values of connectivity parameters may not be used as a measure of true PSII connectivity. Nevertheless, the insignificant differences between the F 0 values Masitinib (AB1010) before and after HL treatment and the maintained significance of differences between the sun and shade leaves suggest that the estimate of connectivity parameters could not be as prone to errors due to PQ redox status as expected. The membrane model parameters (Table 4) show energy flux parameters per active RC. A higher value of the inferred absorbance per RC (ABS/RC) in shade leaves before HL treatment (~2.6) as compared to the sun leaves (~2.2) seems to indicate increased antenna size per active RC (Strasser et al. 2000; Stirbet and Govindjee 2011). However, a correction for connectivity (Suppl. Table 2; see information given in parentheses), i.e., multiplying the ABS/RC by 1 + C where C is the curvature constant of the relative variable fluorescence curve (Force et al.