1 / 7

Photosynthetic parameters Marcel Babin

Photosynthetic parameters Marcel Babin. measured variables. Photosynthetic parameters derived from P vs. E (14C) curves (10 depths, 1L) Parameters derived from measurements of variable fluorescence : discrete samples : PAM (10 depth, 100ml) in situ measurements: FRRF. P max.

griffin-juarez
Download Presentation

Photosynthetic parameters Marcel Babin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Photosynthetic parametersMarcel Babin

  2. measured variables • Photosynthetic parameters derived from P vs. E (14C) curves (10 depths, 1L) • Parameters derived from measurements of variable fluorescence : • discrete samples : PAM (10 depth, 100ml) • in situ measurements: FRRF

  3. Pmax P (mg C m-3 h-1) a Ek PAR (mole Quanta m-2 s-1) Fc = P / 12 (PAR . a) a= absorption coefficient m-1 mole C mole Quanta-1 P vs E curve P = Pmax tanh(PAR /Ek) Ek = Pmax /a Fcmax = a / 12 a

  4. PROSOPE Bruyant, 2002

  5. a* aB PBmax FCmax m2 mg Chla-1 mg C mg Chla-1 h-1 mg C mg Chla-1 h-1 mole Quanta m-2 s-1 mole C mole quanta micro 0.105 ± 0.660 0.020 ± 0.002 7.27 ± 0.66 0.125 nano 0.046 ± 0.004 0.021 ± 0.001 2.33 ± 0.24 0.051 pico 0.017 ± 0.005 0.037 ± 0.001 0.47 ± 0.29 0.011 R2 = 0.72 R2 = 0.91 R2 = 0.73 n = 344 n = 344 n = 344 Photo-physiological parameters might be dependant on phytoplankton community composition (POMME results)

  6. Main hypothesis to be tested on BIOSOPE : Is the efficiency of carbon fixation dependant on the taxonomic groups (size) which are present (large phytoplankton more efficient than small one)? • More easy to parameterise than a dependence on environmental variables (T°, Nutrient and light) • Potential applications for bio-optical models • Besides P vs E measurements : Absorption, HPLC pigments, and 14C primary production (other approach to test the dependence of carbon fixation efficiency on taxonomic composition)

  7. PSIIred Fm Fv PSIIox Fo 0 Parameters deduced from variable fluorescence measurements on discrete samples and in situ. fPS2 = (Fm – Fo ) / Fm sPS2

More Related