ArticlePlant & cell physiology2025
Photochemical reflectance index and its relation to photosynthetic characteristics under dynamic light environment.
Article in Plant & cell physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The photochemical reflectance index (PRI) is a normalized reflectance index that is expected to be useful for estimating photosynthetic activity based on remote-sensing images. Experimental and theoretical studies have examined how the PRI is related to photosynthesis, but they have been based on observations under steady-state light conditions. Photosynthetic systems display differential temporal responsiveness when exposed to variation in light intensity. Here, we examined the responses of the CO2 assimilation rate (A), quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (ФP), nonphotochemical quenching (NPQ), and the PRI in two poplar species, one being a hybrid that does not close stomata in the dark (nonclosing type). When dark-adapted leaves were exposed to strong light (induction phase), the response time was ФP = NPQ < PRI < A for the normal type and ФP = NPQ < PRI = A for the nonclosing type. Consequently, the PRI-NPQ and the PRI-A relationships differed between the steady-state and induction phase. On the other hand, when the light-adapted leaves were transferred from dark to light, the time response was similar among ФP, NPQ, and the PRI. Therefore, the PRI can be used to assess ФP and NPQ even under dynamic light conditions if light-adapted leaves are used. Our results imply that, following sudden increases in light intensity, CO2 assimilation in the normal type poplar is limited by stomatal conductance, and that PSII-related parameters, including the PRI, are temporally decoupled from A. Estimates of A based on the PRI would be overestimates under dynamic conditions, which needs to be taken into account when interpreting remote-sensing data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.