Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Plants for Toxicity Assessment
By
W Wang
W Wang
1
Symposium Chairman and Editor
?
Illinois State Water Survey
?
Peoria, IL 61652
Search for other works by this author on:
JW Gorsuch
JW Gorsuch
2
Symposium Co-Chairman and Editor
?
Eastman Kodak Company
?
Rochester, NY 14652-3617
Search for other works by this author on:
WR Lower
WR Lower
3
Symposium Co-Chairman and Editor
?
University of Missouri
?
Columbia, MO 65203
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN-10:
0-8031-1397-8
ISBN:
978-0-8031-1397-8
No. of Pages:
371
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
1990

The chlorophyll fluorescence (CF) assay is recognized as an important tool for monitoring the electron transport system of photosynthesis. The increase or decrease of fluorescence, compared to control, can indicate a lesion in the chain of events in photosynthesis or damage to the chloroplasts. Inhibition of photosynthesis in leaf segments of Tradescantia by herbicides (glyphosate, picloram & 2,4-D, triclopyr and hexazinone), heavy metals (Zn, Cu, Cd), a surfactant (sodium lauryl sulfate), and sodium fluoride (NaF) has been demonstrated using this method. The strongest changes of fluorescence induction curves were caused by hexazinone. Photosynthetic inhibition was observed as an increase in initial fluorescence (Fo) and a decrease in variable fluorescence (Fv) and electron pool size (EP). A CF assay predicted herbicidal injury in Tradescantia leaves at least 24 h before leaf necrosis appeared.

Three heavy metals (Zn, Cu, Cd) are known as strong respiration and photosynthetic inhibitors in plant cells. In this study cadmium chloride, at the highest concentration (1000 ppm) tested, caused the strongest changes in Fv and EP size, which are characteristics of Photosystem II (PS II) photochemistry. Phytotoxicity of NaF caused an increase in Fv and EP compared to the control.

1.
Smillie
,
R. M.
,
Plant Science Letters
, Vol.
28
, 1982/83, pp. 283–289.
2.
Krause
,
H. G.
and
Weis
,
E.
,
Photosynthesis Research
, Vol.
5
,
1984
, pp. 139–157.
3.
Schreiber
,
U.
,
Vidaver
,
W.
,
Runeckles
,
V. C.
, and
Rosen
,
P.
,
Plant Physiology
, Vol.
61
,
1978
, pp. 80–84.
4.
Schreiber
,
U.
and
Berry
,
J. A.
,
Planta
, Vol.
136
,
1977
, pp. 233–238.
5.
Hetherington
,
S. E.
,
Smillie
,
R. M.
,
Malagamba
,
P.
, and
Huaman
,
Z.
,
Planta
, Vol.
159
,
1983
, pp. 119–124.
6.
Samson
,
G.
and
Popovic
,
R.
,
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
, Vol.
16
,
1988
, pp. 272–278.
7.
Ali
,
A.
and
Machado
,
V. S.
,
Weed Research
, Vol.
21
,
1981
, pp. 191–197.
8.
Schreiber
,
U.
,
Photosynthesis Research
, Vol.
4
,
1983
, pp. 361–373.
9.
Lower
,
W. R.
,
Yanders
,
A. F.
,
Marrero
,
T. R.
,
Underbrink
,
A. G.
,
Drobney
,
V. K.
, and
Collins
,
M. D.
,
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
, Vol.
4
,
1985
, pp. 13–19.
10.
Thomas
,
M. W.
 et al
, this publication, pp. 235–254.
11.
Vidaver
,
W.
,
Popovic
,
R.
,
Bruce
,
D.
, and
Colbow
,
K.
,
Photochemistry and Photobiology
, Vol.
34
,
1981
, pp. 633–636.
12.
Lavorel
,
T.
,
Brenton
,
J.
, and
Lutz
,
M.
in
Light Emission by Plants and Bacteria
,
Govindjee
J.
and
Fork
D. C.
, Eds.,
Academic Press
,
San Diego, Calif.
,
1986
, pp. 57–98.
13.
Snedecor
,
G. W.
and
Cochran
,
W. G.
,
Statistical Methods
,
ISU Press
,
Ames, Iowa
,
1980
.
14.
Schreiber
,
U.
and
Armond
,
P. A.
,
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta
, Vol.
502
,
1978
, pp. 138–151.
15.
De Filippis
,
L. F.
,
Hampp
,
R.
, and
Ziegler
,
U.
,
Archives of Microbiology
 0302-8933, Vol.
128
,
1981
, pp. 407–411.
16.
Li
,
E. H.
and
Miles
,
C. D.
,
Plant Science Letters
, Vol.
5
,
1975
, pp. 33–40.
17.
Samson
,
G.
,
Morissette
,
J. C.
, and
Popovic
,
R.
,
Photochemistry and Photobiology
, Vol.
48
,
1988
, pp. 329–332.
18.
Vierke
,
G.
and
Struckmeier
,
P. Z.
,
Naturforsch
, Vol.
C33
,
1978
, pp. 266–270.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal