Paper 3Fig. 5. Net photosynthesis at light <strong>and</strong> CO 2 saturation (y)as a function of leaf chlorophyll content x) of Lobeliadortmanna (upper panel) <strong>and</strong> Littorella uniflora (lowerpanel). Measurements were made with leaves fromcontrol <strong>sediment</strong>s (open symbols) <strong>and</strong> <strong>sediment</strong>sreceiv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g amounts of labile organic matter(0.1-1.6% DW; gradually darker symbols).Littorella <strong>sediment</strong>s, whereas Lobelia <strong>sediment</strong>swent anoxic. The higher oxygenation ofLittorella <strong>sediment</strong>s can be expla<strong>in</strong>ed by thehigher biomass, photosynthesis <strong>and</strong> darktransport of O 2 from the lake water through the<strong>plant</strong> to the <strong>sediment</strong>. High O 2 permeability ofLittorella’s leaf surfaces can account for thesubstantial O 2 content (10 kPa) <strong>in</strong> the leaflacunae <strong>in</strong> the dark despite anoxic <strong>sediment</strong>s,whereas Lobelia’s leaf surfaces are almostimpermeable <strong>and</strong> lacunae go anoxic <strong>in</strong> the dark.The higher resistance to O 2 release from leafthan root surfaces of Lobelia accords with thepredom<strong>in</strong>ant (90-100%) release of O 2 from rootsurfaces dur<strong>in</strong>g photosynthesis, whereasLittorella releases more O 2 from leaves (72%)than roots (28 %; S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen et al. 1982, S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen & Prahl 1982). Thus, whereas Lobeliaturns anoxic entirely when <strong>in</strong> anoxic <strong>sediment</strong>s,Littorella’s leaves rema<strong>in</strong> oxic <strong>and</strong> rootscont<strong>in</strong>ue to receive O 2 from the lake waterthrough leaf surfaces <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>tra-<strong>plant</strong> downwardtransport. The longest Littorella roots,nonetheless, face O 2 deficiency on highlyreduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>sediment</strong>s accord<strong>in</strong>g to observed FeSprecipitates at the root tips <strong>and</strong> the roots growshorter to ensure sufficient downward O 2transport to the active meristmatic root zone(Colmer 2003, Raun et al. 2010). Lobelia ismuch more susceptible to <strong>sediment</strong> anoxia <strong>and</strong>reduces root development earlier <strong>and</strong> moreprofoundly than Littorella upon organicenrichment of the <strong>sediment</strong> (Fig. 4, see alsoRaun et al. 2010).The almost gas impermeable leaf surfaceof Lobelia is responsible for extensive anoxia <strong>in</strong>all <strong>plant</strong> tissue once the O 2 supply from the<strong>sediment</strong> vanishes. A few hours of anoxia late atnight is a natural recurr<strong>in</strong>g phenomenon even onnutrient-poor, low-organic s<strong>and</strong>y <strong>sediment</strong>sdur<strong>in</strong>g summer because the species has almostno O 2 uptake from the water (Møller & S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen 2011). Even a modest <strong>in</strong>crease of O 2consumption <strong>in</strong> the <strong>sediment</strong>s due to supply oflabile organic matter, therefore, <strong>in</strong>creases theduration of night anoxia <strong>in</strong> Lobelia <strong>in</strong> contrast toLittorella leaves which rema<strong>in</strong> permanentlyoxic. It is unlikely that the leaf anatomy ofLobelia has been selected to optimize O 2<strong>dynamics</strong> because it strongly <strong>in</strong>creases the riskof anoxia <strong>and</strong> several associated stress reactions.Thus, low leaf permeability must havealternative advantages <strong>in</strong> order to have becomeselected.Firstly, the gas impermeable Lobelialeaves reduces the passive loss of CO 2 from the64
Paper 3high <strong>in</strong>ternal concentrations <strong>in</strong> the leaf lacunaeto the low air-equilibrium CO 2 concentrations <strong>in</strong>the lake water. Because CO 2 formation isextremely low <strong>in</strong> prist<strong>in</strong>e, oligotrophic Lobelialakesit is essential to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>timateexchange between the <strong>plant</strong> <strong>and</strong> the <strong>sediment</strong>both dur<strong>in</strong>g photosynthesis <strong>and</strong> respiration <strong>and</strong>m<strong>in</strong>imize CO 2 losses to the lake water becauseCO 2 concentrations needed to saturatephotosynthesis (~ 3000 µM) or just tocompensate respiration (~ 60 µM) are muchhigher than air-saturated levels (~ 15 µM; S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen 1987, Pedersen et al. 1995, W<strong>in</strong>kel &Borum 2009). High permeability of Littorellaleaves could result <strong>in</strong> much greater CO 2 loss tothe lake water <strong>in</strong> the dark, but Littorellapossesses a special physiological feature whichallows temporary <strong>in</strong>corporation of leaf CO 2 byPEP-carboxylase <strong>in</strong>to malate <strong>in</strong> the dark, <strong>and</strong>decarboxylation <strong>and</strong> CO 2 <strong>in</strong>corporation vianormal C-3 photosynthesis <strong>in</strong> the follow<strong>in</strong>g lightperiod, thus lower<strong>in</strong>g <strong>plant</strong>-mediated CO 2release from the <strong>sediment</strong> via the aerenchyma(Madsen 1985). These CO 2 fluxes through the<strong>plant</strong>s have not been quantified as yet.Secondly, the diffusion barrier onLobelia leaves effectively reduces evaporation<strong>and</strong> ensures survival of leaves when theyregularly become exposed to the air follow<strong>in</strong>gdrawdown of the water table dur<strong>in</strong>g summer <strong>in</strong>the seepage lakes (Pedersen & S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen1992). Most submerged aquatic <strong>plant</strong>s,<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Littorella with 12-fold fasterevaporation rates than Lobelia, dry out upon airexposure <strong>and</strong> these species either die or survive,as <strong>in</strong> the case of Littorella, by produc<strong>in</strong>g newaerial, less permeable leaves with cuticle <strong>and</strong>functional stomata (Nielsen et al. 1991). Lobeliadoes not need to <strong>in</strong>vest <strong>in</strong> a new set of leavesfollow<strong>in</strong>g alternat<strong>in</strong>g submergence <strong>and</strong> airexposure which is costly <strong>and</strong> perhaps impossibleconsider<strong>in</strong>g its low <strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic growth rate <strong>and</strong>very nutrient-poor habitat. In contrast, Littorellafaces this extra cost, but also has a faster<strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic growth rate <strong>and</strong> prefers to <strong>in</strong>habitnutrient-richer <strong>sediment</strong>s (S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen &Søndergaard 1978, 1979). Thus, particularstructural <strong>and</strong> physiological adaptations fulfillseveral purposes <strong>and</strong> need to be viewed <strong>in</strong>regard to the entire <strong>plant</strong> life <strong>and</strong> the complexityof environmental conditions.Organic additions had more profound<strong>and</strong> last<strong>in</strong>g effects on <strong>sediment</strong> chemistry <strong>in</strong>laboratory than <strong>in</strong> field experiments. The muchfaster loss of organic matter <strong>and</strong> produced DIC,NH 4 + <strong>and</strong> Fe +2 <strong>in</strong> the field can be expla<strong>in</strong>ed byhigher field temperatures promot<strong>in</strong>g degradationrates, longer days with higher irradiancesstimulat<strong>in</strong>g oxygenation <strong>and</strong>, thereby, organicdegradation <strong>and</strong>, very likely, better physicalexchange by pressure waves or groundwaterflow between pore-water <strong>and</strong> lake water.Anoxic stress, nutrient supply <strong>and</strong> <strong>plant</strong>performanceLobelia experienced extensive anoxia <strong>in</strong> bothleaves <strong>and</strong> roots by organic enrichment, whereasLittorella leaves always rema<strong>in</strong>ed oxic <strong>and</strong>could supply O 2 to the roots. More widespreadanoxia <strong>in</strong> Lobelia will impede effective ATPformation by oxidative phosphorylation, exhaustenergy resources (Greenway & Gibbs 2003a,b)<strong>and</strong>, <strong>in</strong> turn, restrict ion uptake <strong>and</strong> transportfrom roots to shoots (Colmer & Flowers 2008;Møller & S<strong>and</strong>-Jensen 2011). Catabolicprocesses to susta<strong>in</strong> the photosyntheticapparatus <strong>in</strong> the leaves can also be impededbecause less metabolic energy <strong>and</strong> fewernutrients are available. This may account for thedecl<strong>in</strong>e of nutrients, chlorophyll <strong>and</strong>65