Chloroplast Movements in Response to Environmental Signals

Light-harvesting regulation from leaf to molecule with the emphasis on rapid changes in antenna size

In the sunlight-fluctuating environment, plants often encounter both light-deficiency and light-excess cases. Therefore, regulation of light harvesting is absolutely essential for photosynthesis in order to maximize light utilization at low light and avoid photodamage of the photosynthetic apparatus at high light. Plants have developed a series of strategies of light-harvesting regulation during evolution. These strategies include rapid responses such as leaf movement and chloroplast movement, state transitions, and reversible dissociation of some light-harvesting complex of the photosystem II (LHCIIs) from PSII core complexes, and slow acclimation strategies such as changes in the protein abundance of light-harvesting antenna and modifications of leaf morphology, structure, and compositions. This review discusses successively these strategies and focuses on the rapid change in antenna size, namely reversible dissociation of some peripheral light-harvesting antennas (LHCIIs) from PSII core complex. It is involved in protective role and species dependence of the dissociation, differences between the dissociation and state transitions, relationship between the dissociation and thylakoid protein phosphorylation, and possible mechanism for thermal dissipation by the dissociated LHCIIs.

The kinesin-like proteins, KAC1/2, regulate actin dynamics underlying chloroplast light-avoidance in Physcomitrella patens

In plants, light determines chloroplast position; these organelles show avoidance and accumulation responses in high and low fluence-rate light, respectively. Chloroplast motility in response to light is driven by cytoskeletal elements. The actin cytoskeleton mediates chloroplast photorelocation responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. In contrast, in the moss Physcomitrella patens, both, actin filaments and microtubules can transport chloroplasts. Because of the surprising evidence that two kinesin-like proteins (called KACs) are important for actin-dependent chloroplast photorelocation in vascular plants, we wanted to determine the cytoskeletal system responsible for the function of these proteins in moss. We performed gene-specific silencing using RNA interference in P. patens. We confirmed existing reports using gene knockouts, that PpKAC1 and PpKAC2 are required for chloroplast dispersion under uniform white light conditions, and that the two proteins are functionally equivalent. To address the specific cytoskeletal elements responsible for motility, this loss-of-function approach was combined with cytoskeleton-targeted drug studies. We found that, in P. patens, these KACs mediate the chloroplast light-avoidance response in an actin filament-dependent, rather than a microtubule-dependent manner. Using correlation-decay analysis of cytoskeletal dynamics, we found that PpKAC stabilizes cortical actin filaments, but has no effect on microtubule dynamics.

Ecophysiological and anatomical mechanisms behind the nurse effect: which are more important? A multivariate approach for cactus seedlings

BACKGROUND

Cacti establish mostly occurs under the canopy of nurse plants which provide a less stressful micro-environment, although mechanisms underlying this process are unknown. The impact of the combination of light and watering treatments on Opuntia streptacantha (Cactaceae) seedlings was examined.

METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Ecophysiological [titratable acidity, osmotic potential ('solute potential', Ψs ), relative growth rate (RGR) and their components (NAR, SLA, and LWR)], anatomical (chloroplast density, chloroplast frequency, and cell area), and environmental [photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) and air temperature] sets of variables were analyzed, assessing relationships between them and measuring the intensity of the relationships. Three harvests were carried out at days 15, 30, and 45. Ψs and acidity content were the most important responses for seedling establishment. The main anatomical and environmental variables were chloroplast density and water availability, respectively. Opuntia streptacantha seedlings establish better in the shade-watering treatment, due to higher Ψs and acidity, unaffected chloroplasts, and lower PPFD. In addition, the chloroplasts of cells under high-light and non-watering treatment were clumped closer to the center of the cytosol than those under shade-drought, to avoid photoinhibition and/or to better distribute or utilize the penetrating light in the green plant tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

Opuntia seedlings grow better under the shade, although they can tolerate drought in open spaces by increasing and moving chloroplasts and avoiding drastic decreases in their Ψs . This tolerance could have important implications for predicting the impact of climate change on natural desert regeneration, as well as for planning reforestation-afforestation practices, and rural land uses.

Differential positioning of chloroplasts in C4 mesophyll and bundle sheath cells

Chloroplast photorelocation movement is extensively studied in C3 but not C4 plants. C4 plants have 2 types of photosynthetic cells: mesophyll and bundle sheath cells. Mesophyll chloroplasts are randomly distributed along cell walls, whereas bundle sheath chloroplasts are located close to the vascular tissues or mesophyll cells depending on the plant species. The cell-specific C 4 chloroplast arrangement is established during cell maturation, and is maintained throughout the life of the cell. However, only mesophyll chloroplasts can change their positions in response to environmental stresses. The migration pattern is unique to C4 plants and differs from that of C3 chloroplasts. In this mini-review, we highlight the cell-specific disposition of chloroplasts in C4 plants and discuss the possible physiological significances.

The avoidance and aggregative movements of mesophyll chloroplasts in C(4) monocots in response to blue light and abscisic acid

In C(4) plants, mesophyll (M) chloroplasts are randomly distributed along the cell walls, whereas bundle sheath chloroplasts are located in either a centripetal or centrifugal position. It was reported previously that only M chloroplasts aggregatively redistribute to the bundle sheath side in response to extremely strong light or environmental stresses. The aggregative movement of M chloroplasts is also induced in a light-dependent fashion upon incubation with abscisic acid (ABA). The involvement of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and red/blue light in the aggregative movement of M chloroplasts are examined here in two distinct subtypes of C(4) plants, finger millet and maize. Exogenously applied hydrogen peroxide or ROS scavengers could not change the response patterns of M chloroplast movement to light and ABA. Blue light irradiation essentially induced the rearrangement of M chloroplasts along the sides of anticlinal walls, parallel to the direction of the incident light, which is analogous to the avoidance movement of C(3) chloroplasts. In the presence of ABA, most of the M chloroplasts showed the aggregative movement in response to blue light but not red light. Together these results suggest that ROS are not involved in signal transduction for the aggregative movement, and ABA can shift the blue light-induced avoidance movement of C(4)-M chloroplasts to the aggregative movement.

Differential positioning of C4 mesophyll and bundle sheath chloroplasts: aggregative movement of C4 mesophyll chloroplasts in response to environmental stresses

In C(4) plants, mesophyll (M) chloroplasts are randomly distributed along the cell walls, while bundle sheath (BS) chloroplasts are typically located in either a centripetal or centrifugal position. We investigated whether these intracellular positions are affected by environmental stresses. When mature leaves of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) were exposed to extremely high intensity light, most M chloroplasts aggregatively re-distributed to the BS side, whereas the intracellular arrangement of BS chloroplasts was unaffected. Compared with the homologous light-avoidance movement of M chloroplasts in C(3) plants, it requires extremely high light (3,000-4,000 micromol m(-2) s(-1)) and responds more slowly (distinctive movement observed in 1 h). The high light-induced movement of M chloroplasts was also observed in maize (Zea mays), another C(4) species, but with a distinct pattern of redistribution along the sides of anticlinal walls, analogous to C(3) plants. The aggregative movement of M chloroplasts occurred at normal light intensities (250-500 micromol m(-2) s(-1)) in response to environmental stresses, such as drought, salinity and hyperosmosis. Moreover, the re-arrangement of M chloroplasts was observed in field-grown C(4) plants when exposed to mid-day sunlight, but also under midsummer drought conditions. The migration of M chloroplasts was controlled by actin filaments and also induced in a light-dependent fashion upon incubation with ABA, which may be the physiological signal transducer. Together these results suggest that M and BS cells of C(4) plants have different mechanisms controlling intracellular chloroplast positioning, and that the aggregative movement of C(4) M chloroplasts is thought to be a protective response under environmental stress conditions.

Differential positioning of C(4) mesophyll and bundle sheath chloroplasts: recovery of chloroplast positioning requires the actomyosin system

In C(4) plants, bundle sheath (BS) chloroplasts are arranged in the centripetal position or in the centrifugal position, although mesophyll (M) chloroplasts are evenly distributed along cell membranes. To examine the molecular mechanism for the intracellular disposition of these chloroplasts, we observed the distribution of actin filaments in BS and M cells of the C(4) plants finger millet (Eleusine coracana) and maize (Zea mays) using immunofluorescence. Fine actin filaments encircled chloroplasts in both cell types, and an actin network was observed adjacent to plasma membranes. The intracellular disposition of both chloroplasts in finger millet was disrupted by centrifugal force but recovered within 2 h in the dark. Actin filaments remained associated with chloroplasts during recovery. We also examined the effects of inhibitors on the rearrangement of chloroplasts. Inhibitors of actin polymerization, myosin-based activities and cytosolic protein synthesis blocked migration of chloroplasts. In contrast, a microtubule-depolymerizing drug had no effect. These results show that C(4) plants possess a mechanism for keeping chloroplasts in the home position which is dependent on the actomyosin system and cytosolic protein synthesis but not tubulin or light.