Vredenberg and co-workers (Vredenberg 2000; Vredenberg et al. 2006) developed another interpretation model, in which, in addition to Q A − , the IP phase is determined by the electric field, and JI rise reflects an inactivation of PSII RCs (associated with proton transport over the membrane) in which Pheo− can accumulate. These alternative interpretations were challenged find more by Stirbet and Pexidartinib ic50 Govindjee (2012). The first assumption that the F O-to-F

M rise is a reflection of the reduction of Q A implies that it should always be possible to reach F M, since all Q A can be reduced if the light intensity is high enough (i.e., when the excitation rate is much higher than re-oxidation rate of Q A − by forward electron transport and/or the exchange of PQH2

for PQ at the Q B-site). However, Schreiber (1986), Samson and Bruce (1996) and Schansker et al. (2006, 2008) showed in several ways that this is not the case. A second, related, assumption is that there are no changes in non-photochemical quenching during a saturating pulse. Finally, a third assumption is that the parameters F V/F M and ΦPSII are measures of the PSII quantum selleck chemicals llc yield and that ΦPSII can be used to calculate the photosynthetic electron transport rate. For ΦPSII, this assumption has been partially verified experimentally, showing under several conditions a linear correlation between the calculated photosynthetic electron transport rate and the CO2 assimilation rate (Genty et al. 1989; Krall and Edwards 1992 and see Questions 29 and 30). We note that the meaning of the parameter F V/F M has not been derived experimentally but is Idoxuridine based on an analysis of so-called competitive rate equations (fluorescence emission competes with other processes like heat emission and photosynthesis) for the F O and F M states (Kitajima and Butler 1975; Kramer et al. 2004). This

analysis is correct as long as the fluorescence rise between F O and F M is determined by the reduction of Q A only (see Schansker et al. 2014 for a discussion of this point). Question 22. Are there naturally occurring fluorescence quenchers other than Q A? Another fluorescence quencher that has been described extensively is P680+ (Butler 1972; Zankel 1973; Shinkarev and Govindjee 1993; Steffen et al. 2005). The short lifetime of P680+ keeps the population of this quencher low under most conditions. Simulation work has shown that under high light conditions, the highest concentration should occur around the J-step (Lazár 2003), which was supported by experimental observations (Schansker et al. 2011). However, P680+ quenching does not affect the F O and F M levels. Oxidized PQ molecules can also quench fluorescence, but only in isolated thylakoids and in PSII-enriched membranes (Vernotte et al. 1979; Kurreck et al. 2000; Tóth et al. 2005a) and not in leaves (Tóth et al. 2005a).