Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1988 Apr;86(4):1032-7.
doi: 10.1104/pp.86.4.1032.

Gradients of Intercellular CO(2) Levels Across the Leaf Mesophyll

Affiliations

Gradients of Intercellular CO(2) Levels Across the Leaf Mesophyll

D F Parkhurst et al. Plant Physiol. 1988 Apr.

Abstract

Most current photosynthesis models, and interpretations of many wholeleaf CO(2) gas exchange measurements, are based on the often unstated assumption that the partial pressure of CO(2) is nearly uniform throughout the airspaces of the leaf mesophyll. Here we present measurements of CO(2) gradients across amphistomatous leaves allowed to assimilate CO(2) through only one surface, thus simulating hypostomatous leaves. We studied five species: Eucalyptus pauciflora Sieb. ex Spreng., Brassica chinensis L., Gossypium hirsutum L., Phaseolus vulgaris L., and Spinacia oleracea L. For Eucalyptus, maximum CO(2) pressure differences across the leaf mesophyll were 73 and 160 microbar when the pressures outside the lower leaf surface were 310 and 590 microbar, respectively. Using an approximate theoretical calculation, we infer that if the CO(2) had been supplied equally at both surfaces then the respective mean intercellular CO(2) pressures would have been roughly 12 and 27 microbar less than the pressures in the substomatal cavities in these cases. For ambient CO(2) pressures near 320 microbar, the average and minimum pressure differences across the mesophyll were 45 and 13 microbar. The corresponding mean intercellular CO(2) pressures would then be roughly 8 and 2 microbar less than those in the substomatal cavities. Pressure differences were generally smaller for the four agricultural species than for Eucalyptus, but they were nevertheless larger than previously reported values.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Plant Physiol. 1986 Apr;80(4):877-83 - PubMed
    1. Plant Physiol. 1982 Mar;69(3):657-9 - PubMed
    1. Plant Physiol. 1984 Jan;74(1):47-51 - PubMed
    1. J Theor Biol. 1977 Aug 7;67(3):471-88 - PubMed
    1. Plant Physiol. 1978 Jun;61(6):1000-5 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources