• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Morphology, Growth, Photosynthesis and Pigments in Laminaria Ochroleuca (Laminariales, Phaeophyta) Under Ultraviolet Radiation

Posted on: Saturday, 6 November 2004, 03:00 CST

Young sporophytes of Laminaria ochroleuca were exposed in the laboratory either to a full light spectrum or to light depleted of only ultraviolet-B radiation (UVB) or of the whole ultraviolet radiation (UVR) using cutoff glass filters. The plants were grown under 16:8 h light-dark cycles with 6 h additional UV exposure in the middle of the light phase. Effective quantum yield of photosystem II (ΔF/Fm') was measured daily, 1 h before UV exposure, at 2 and 5 h cumulative UV exposure and at 1 and 4 h after UV exposure. Growth was measured using two methods in separate experiments. In the first, a scanner with image analysis software was used to measure surface area every 3 days for 4 weeks. In the second, a growth chamber with online video measuring technique was used to measure growth every 10 min for 2 weeks. Pigments were measured at the end of the experiments. During the first day of UV exposure, the photosynthetic yield of plants exposed to photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) + ultraviolet-A radiation (UVA) and PAR + UVA + UVB was significantly reduced but was able to recover 1 h after the end of UV exposure. An increasing mean ΔF/ Fm' during UV exposure showed partial acclimation of photosynthesis in young sporophytes in the course of several days. However, a higher growth rate was observed in plants exposed to PAR alone, whereas reduced growth and damaged tissue were observed in plants exposed to UVR. Similarly, a lower content of all pigments was measured in thalli exposed to PAR + UVR. The result shows that acclimation of photosynthesis could underestimate the negative effect of this stress factor. Growth, as an integrative process, is a better parameter to explain ecophysiological performance at organism level. It was shown that growth and morphology of young sporophytes of L. ochroleuca are susceptible to UV damage, which could effectively limit the upper distributional range of this species.

INTRODUCTION

Across a latitudinal gradient, Laminaria ochroleuca de la Pylaie is distributed along the Atlantic coast of Northern Africa to the southwestern part of the British Isles (John 1969; Price et al. 1978; Sheppard et al. 1978; Benhissoune et al 2002), the Mediterranean coast (Ribera et al. 1992) and an isolated population in the Strait of Messina (Drew 1972, 1974). It inhabits the littoral zones between 0 and 2 m above low water (John 1969, 1971; Sheppard et al. 1978) and also depths in excess of 100 m (Drew 1972). Until recently, its population density was reported to vary between sites only in relation to water quality and exposure to wave action and current surge. In Spain, within the 0-2 m zone, higher density was observed in an estuarine and sheltered site (8-30 plants m^sup -2^) compared to a site exposed to wave action (3 plants m^sup -2^) (John 1971). At the same tide level at the French coast, much lower density (2 plants m^sup -2^) was observed due to synergistic effect of wave and current surge (Sheppard et al. 1978). Along the Strait of Messina, a dense population was observed between 50 and 100 m depth, where water clarity is similar to Jerlov's (1976) type IB Oceanic water, and 5% of surface photosynthetically active radiation (PAR; 18 W m^sup -2^) reaches the kelp community at 50 m (Drew et al. 1982). However, these are not the only factors that could affect population density across a vertical gradient.

Several physiological studies have established a correlation between stress tolerance and the vertical distribution of seaweeds. These stress factors include inhibiting PAR (e.g. Hanelt et al. 1997a, b; Hanelt 1998) and ultraviolet radiation (UVR; e.g. Dring et al. 1996a; Hanelt et al. 1997e; Bischof et al. J998a). Eulittoral macrophytes are periodically exposed to the full solar spectrum during low tides. Consequently, chronic exposure to increasing solar UVR might present some deleterious effect. Intertidal algae may possess photoadaptive mechanisms to minimize damage by solar radiation. When exposed to irradiances exceeding the energy requirement for photosynthesis, a strong degradation of the reaction centre protein (D1) of photosystem II (PS II) can occur (Ohad et al. 1984). This process is called chronic photoinhibition to distinguish it from the xanthophyll cycle, in which quantum yield of photosynthesis is regulated (Demmig-Adams & Adams 1992). On the other hand, dynamic photoinhibition involves a fast reversible process where the quantum yields of PS II are diminished by increasing thermal energy dissipation controlled by carotenoids (Osmond 1994).

The increasing UVR on the earth's surface caused by stratospheric ozone depletion has been well documented in the polar and temperate regions (Smith et al. 1992; Pearce 1996). Aside from the extensive studies done in polar regions (e.g. Hanelt et al. 1997c; Bischof et al. 2001, 2002a), other geographical locations have received meagre attention with respect to the potential effect of UVR to the biosphere. In Spain, for example, levels of ultraviolet-B radiation (UVB) have been reported to be high and persistent under long periods of open sky condition (Altamirano et al. 2000a, b). Despite this fact, most of the studies conducted on the ccophysiological response of the macrothalli of seaweeds to UVR in this region are limited to few species of green (e.g. Prez-Rodrguez et al. 1998; Bischof et al. 2002b). red (e.g. Flores-Moya et al. 1998; Gmez et al. 2001) and brown (e.g. Jimnez et al. 1998; Hder et al. 2001) seaweeds but not Laminariales.

UVR sensitivity of Laminariales is known in species from polar (e.g. Bischof et al. 1998b, 1999; Aguilera et al. 1999) and cold temperate (e.g. Dring et al. 1996b, 2001; Makarov & Voskoboinikov 2001) waters, whereas only few data are available from lower latitudes (Yabe et al. 1997; Wiencke et al. 2000). Moreover, only few studies have been conducted on the effect of irradiance as a stress factor on L. ochroleuca (e.g. Wiencke et al. 2000; Izquierdo et al. 2001). On the other hand, most studies on the impact of UVR examine the vulnerability of large sporophytes. To determine the depth zonation of these species, it is also important to consider the susceptibility of other life stages to UVR (e.g. Dring et al. 1996b; Huovinen et al. 2000; Wiencke et al. 2000; Baares et al. 2002; Altamirano et al. 2003). In L. ochroleuca, zoospores are extremely sensitive to UVR (Wiencke et al. 2000). However, in the field, where spores and germlings of kelps can be found to remain competent in plankton for extended periods of time (Reed et al. 1992), surviving spores are still capable of dispersal, settlement, attachment and initiation of new individuals across the expanse of the vertical tidal zones, especially in crevices and sheltered tide pools. We develop the hypothesis that the susceptibility of young sporophytes to UVR effectively determines the upper distribution limit of this species. Young sporophytes in the eulittoral zone are periodically exposed to air during low tides and the whole spectrum of solar radiation which may contribute to the postrecruitment mortality of this species and exclude L. ochroleuca from higher parts of the shore, especially at sun-exposed locations. Therefore, the present study focuses on the impact of UVR on the photosynthetic parameters, growth and morphological integrity of young L. ochroleuca sporophytes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Algal material

Cultures of L. ochroleuca gametophytes, originally established from fertile sporophytes collected from Puerto de San Pedro, La Corua, NW Spain (4322'N; 826'W), were used to obtain young sporophytes. They were grown aerated in glass beakers filled with Provasoli enriched seawater (Provasoli 1968) inside a temperature- controlled room at 15C and 10 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^ white light at 12: 12 h light-dark (LD) photoperiod.

Laboratory incubation system, experimental design and measuring procedures

In the first experiment, a large How-through basin (600 400 120 mm) was installed inside a 15C temperature-controlled room. Inside the basin, polyvinyl chloride-U (PVC-U) pipes (dark grey, 120 mm diameter 70 mm height, both ends open) were placed upright and served as enclosures for the algae in each treatment. The PVC-U pipes had a 5 mm diameter hole at the bottom for water inflow through silicon tubes and water flows out into the basin through four equidistant 10 mm diameter holes around the PVC-U pipes covered with mesh. From a reservoir, 80 litres of filtered and sterile scawaler was pumped into the basin through the PVC-U pipes using submersible water pump (Typ 1060, 38 litre min^sup -1^; Eheim, Deizisau, Germany), which also provided water movement inside the PVC pipes. Water level in the basin was maintained at 60 mm, to simulate low tide water, by circulating water back to the reservoir. During the experiment, water temperature was maintained at 15 1C as the optimum temperature for growth (Wiencke et al. 1994). Water in the reservoir was changed weekly with fresh sterilized seawater to prevent depletion of nutrients.

To determine the effects of different light treatments of PAR (P), PAR + ultraviolet-Aradiation (UVA) (PA) and PAR + UVA + UVB (PAB) on whole young L. ochroleuca thalli (average size 250-300 mm^sup 2^, n = 5), lamps were fixed 40 cm above the flow-through basin. Three white fluorescent lamps (L65 Watt/25S; Osram, Munich, Germany), emitting background PAR resulted in a fluence rate of about 10 W m^sup -2^ (50 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^). Three UV lamps (UVA-340, 40 W; Q-Panel, Cleveland, OH, USA), emitting a spectrum similar to solar radiation in the range 295-340 nm, provided 6.0 W m^sup -2^ UVA and 0.5 W m^sup -2^ of UVB. Three kinds of glass filters - Quartz, WG320 and GG400 (Schott Glass Technologies, Duryea, PA, USA) were used to cut off different UV wavelength ranges from the spectrum. Irradiation conditions (280-700 nm) were measured using a cosine sensor connected to a UV-VIS Spectrometer (M. Kruse, Bremerhaven, Germany) below the glass filters. Acclimated whole thalli (3 days at 10 W m^sup -2^ white light and 15C) were grown for 4 weeks under 16:8 h LD cycles (0500-2100 hours) with 6 h UV exposure in the middle of the light phase (0900-1500 hours). Photosynthetic activity was determined by measuring the variable chlorophyll (Ch1) fluorescence of PS II with a Diving PAM device (Walz, Effeltrich, Germany). Measurement of the effective quantum yield (ΔF/Fm') was done daily, 1 h before UV exposure (0800 hours), at 2 and 5 h after the start of UV exposure (1000, 1400 hours) and at 1 and 4 h after the end of UV exposure (1600, 1900 hours).

Higher total light energy was measured among PAR + UV treatments (PA and PAB) in the above experiment than under PAR alone (GG 400; see Table 1). In this regard, a second experiment was conducted in the same flow-through basin culture system to determine the effects of varying photon flux density (PFD) of PAR. This was done to ensure that the negative physiological effect on the young thalli was due to light quality (presence of UVR) and not due to a different total light energy in the first experiment. Three white fluorescent lamps (L65 Watt/258; Osram) were used and four PAR levels (30, 40, 50 and 60 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^) were achieved by varying the distance between the basins and the light source and by using neutral grey mesh covers. Light was measured using a cosine quantum sensor (Type 1925B; LI-COR Biosciences, Bad Homburg, Germany) attached to a LI- COR data logger (LI-1000). Basal parts ( 6 mm of the phylloid, including the meristem) were cut from the whole plants (average size 30 mm^sup 2^) and acclimated for 3 days al 10 W m^sup -2^ white light and 15C before being used in this experiment. They were grown for 3 weeks under the same LD cycles. Effective quantum yield (ΔF/Fm') was measured every 4 h from 0800-2000 hours using the Diving PAM. In both experiments, growth, in terms of surface area increase (mm^sup 2^), was measured every 3 days using a scanner connected to a personal computer (PC) and WinFolia 5.0 image analysis software (Regent Instrument, Quebec City, Canada).

Table 1. Irradiances applied to the growth experiments in the respective laboratory incubation system.

Online video growth measurement technique

Three growth chambers with online video measuring technique were constructed by ISITEC (Bremerhaven, Germany). The growth chamber (attached to a water-circulating system) was equipped with a Charged Coupled Device camera coupled to a PC. A sliding metal platform with top and bottom plate of UV-transparent Plexiglas chambers at the centre was positioned 20 cm above the camera. The top Plexiglas chamber (12 16.5 3.5 cm, constructed with side frames) was designed to be laid hanging over the bottom chamber (17.5 17.5 4 cm), where the algae are fixed on tiny nails attached to the bottom chamber. The space between the top and bottom Plexiglas chambers allows the circulating seawater to pass through. The water- circulating system comprised a cooling unit (Aqua Medic, Bissendorf, Germany) and 30 litre reservoir tank filled with filtered and pasteurized seawater. Seawater was cooled to 15C and pumped into the growth chamber by a centrifugal water pump (Eheim Typ 1060, 38 litre min^sup -1^). Light sources were mounted 15 cm above the platform consisting of two white fluorescent lamps (TL 8W/965; Philips, Eindhoven, Netherlands) and two UV lamps (Q-Panel UVA-340, 40 W). Infrared diodes were mounted at the sides of the chamber to produce infrared images of the object for the video camera, also during the dark periods. The captured image was analysed by a MedeaLAB Count and Classify software (Multimedia and Software GmbH, Erlangen, Germany), which measures growth of the algae in terms of increased number of pixels. In each growth chamber, two basal pieces of the thallus (average size = 30 mm^sup 2^, 6 mm of the phylloid including the meristem), positioned 20 mm from each other, were fixed between the top and bottom of the UV-transparent Plexiglas chamber and acclimated for 3 days without UV. Two types of glass filters, one cutting off all UV radiation (GG400), the other UV transparent (Quartz) were laid over the top Plexiglas chamber covering the algae for the corresponding treatment. Irradiance was measured as mentioned above. All irradiances applied in each treatment are summarized in Table 1. Growth was continuously measured every 10 min for 2 weeks. Seawater was changed weekly to ensure enough nutrient supply within the medium.

Pigment extraction and characterization

At the end of each growth experiment, algal thalli were transferred to 2 ml Eppendorf tubes and frozen at -80C for high performance liquid chromatography pigment analysis. Frozen samples were treated with 100 l of 100% N-N-dimethylformamide and stored in darkness for approximately 16 h. Subsequent analyses were performed as described by Bischof et al. (2002e). The whole thallus of the first experiment was divided into three parts (base, mid and tip) to determine the longitudinal profile of Chl a. However, due to tissue sample limitation, no replicate was analysed. Samples from the online growth chamber were analysed for Chl a, Chl c^sub 1^, fucoxanthin and β-carotene in triplicate.

Data analysis

All data were tested for homogeneity of variances (Levene Statistics) and normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test). Corresponding transformations were done to heteroskedastic (unequal variances) and nonnormal data. Time series measurements on the photosynthetic yield (ΔF/Fm') were subjected to repeated measures analysis of variance (RMANOVA) to determine the effects of light treatments across the sampling days.

Growth rate was computed by plotting all data points (entire experiment period) of each replicate per treatment. They were individually fitted to an exponential equation N^sub t^ = N^sub 0^e^sup rt^, where N^sub t^ is growth at time t, N^sub 0^ is initial size and r is the intrinsic rate of increase. Slopes (r) were computed daily for the growth chamber data. Growth rate at time t, rt, is comparable to the growth equation applied by Lning (1979): relative growth rate (% per day) = (ln SA^sub 2^ - ln SA^sub 1^)/ t^sub 2^ - t^sub 1^ 100, where SA^sub 1^ and SA^sub 2^ are the surface areas at t^sub 1^ and t^sub 2^ in days, respectively. Subsequently, the statistical significance of differences in growth rates as affected by light treatments were tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA, P = 0.05). This was followed by Duncan's multiple range test (DMRT, P = 0.05). For the growth chamber and pigment data, where we only tested two variables, comparison between the two groups was done by t-test (P < 0.05). Statistical analyses were done using the SPSS program (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).

RESULTS

Chlorophyll fluorescence: effective quantum yield

During the first day of exposure of young L. ochroleuca sporophytes to 5 h UVR, a reduction of 53% and 61% in the mean effective quantum yield (ΔF/Fm') was observed in the PA and PAB treatments relative to P, respectively. The mean ΔF/Fm'of PA and PAB treatments were observed to recover 1 h after UV lamps were switched off, to 82% and 71% of the P treatment, respectively (Fig. 1). The reduction in the mean ΔF/Fm' of UV-exposed plants became smaller through time (15th and 28th day). After 2 and 5 h of UV exposure (PA and PAB), ΔF/Fm' at the end of the experiment (28th day) was significantly higher than during the first day (Fig. 1), indicating acclimation of the photosynthctic apparatus to UVR.

Fig. 1. Circadian pattern of the mean effective quantum yield of young Laminaria ochroleuca sporophytes (n = 5) exposed to different radiation (PAR = P; PAR + UVA = PA; PAR + UVA + UVB = PAB) during the light phase of the 16:8 h light-dark photoperiod. PFD is 40-50 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^. Vertical bars are standard deviations (s). Corresponding statistical analysis is shown in Table 2.

RMANOVA (P < 0.05) showed a significant effect of irradiance on the effective quantum yield, ΔF/Fm' (Table 2). Sporophytes exposed to PA and PAB had significantly lower ΔF/Fm' during (1100 and 1400 hours) and after (1600 and 1900 hours) UV exposures. Although phutosynthetic recovery was evident when UV lamps were switched off (Fig. 1 ), ΔF/ Fm' of P was still significantly higher compared to PA and PAB. In the morning (0800 hours), ΔF/ Fm' was found to be not significantly different between treatments, indicating further recovery. Final photosynthetic recovery on the 28th day (1900 hours) was 90% of the initial value at the start of the experiment.

Plants exposed to different PFD of PAR (30, 40, 50 and 60 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^) showed significant variation (RMANOVA, P < 0.05) in the time series ΔF/Fm'. The DMRT (P < 0.05) showed significantly higher daily ΔFA/Fm' in plants exposed to lower PAR (Fig. 2).

Table 2. Repeated measures analysis of variance and significance values for the effect of light treatments (P, PA, PAB) on the photosynthetic yields (&\#916;F/Fm') of young Lamimaria ochroleuca sporophytes at every time interval between sampling days (days 1, 15 and 28).

Growth

Higher growth rates were observed in plants exposed to P alone (7.2 0.6% day^sup -1^) compared to plants exposed to PA (4.6 3.1% day^sup -1^) and PAB (3.7 1.1% day^sup -1^). Analysis of variance showed significant effect of treatment (P < 0.05). However, DMRT showed that P is not significantly different with PA, and PA is not significantly different with PAB (Fig. 3). Moreover, tissue damage was evident among plants exposed to PA and PAB showing tissue deformation, necrosis, blistering, lesions, and curling and thickening of the meristematic region (Pig. 4). Different PPDs of PAR have no significant effect on growth (ANOVA, P = 0.354; Pig. 5). At the same PAR level, growth rate at 40 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^ (7.9 0.6% day^sup -1^) is comparable to the first experiment.

In the ISITEC growth chambers experiment, growth over the entire experimental period (fitness of the exponential curve, R^sup 2^ = 0.95 and 0.94 for P and PAB, respectively) were lower for both P (4.4 0.5% day^sup -1^) and PAB (1.9 0.6% day^sup -1^) compared to the growth experiment using the large basin flow-through incubation system. The calculated slope (r = intrinsic rate of increase) was observed to be exponential during the first day in both P (R^sup 2^ = 0.99) and PAB (R^sup 2^ = 0.98) treatments. On the sixth and the 12th day, plants grown under P treatment were still growing exponentially at a lower rate (R^sup 2^ = 0.99 and 0.94, respectively) but not under PAB (Fig. 6). Growth (r) in PAH during the first day was already 36% lower relative to P treatment. It decreased further to 84% on the sixth day and was zero on the 12th day. Therefore, the velocity of increase per unit time in the young sporophytes was unable to acclimate to UVR which significantly lowered the growth rate of sporophytes exposed to PAB (P < 0.05, inset of Fig. 6).

Fig. 2. Daily mean of the effective quantum yields of young Laminaria ochroleuca sporophytes (n = 5), exposed to different PFDs of PAR, measured every 4 h from 0800 to 2000 hours. Vertical bars are standard deviations (s). RMANOVA showed significant difference between treatments (P < 0.001). Letters on graph show result of DMRT (P < 0.05); different letters refer to significant differences between mean values.

Fig. 3. Growth rates of young Laminaria ochroleuca sporophytes exposed to different radiation (PAR = P; PAR + UVA = PA; PAR + UVA + UVB = PAB). PFD was 40-50 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^. Inset shows increase in surface area over time measured using a scanner and image analysis software (WinFolia). Values are x s (n = 5). ANOVA showed significant difference between treatments (P = 0.038). Letters on graph show result of DMRT (P < 0.05); different letters refer to significant differences between mean values.

Fig. 4. Morphological responses of Laminaria ochroleuca after 28 days UVR exposure includes: a, tissue deformation; b, lesion; c, blistering; d, bleaching; c, curling and thickening of the meristematic lamina.

Photosynthetic pigments

Although no replicates were measured, a trend was observed in the longitudinal profile of the Chl a content in the young sporophytes (Table 3). It was observed that regardless of the light treatment, the meristematic and young parts of the thallus contain less pigment than the rest of the thallus. Highest Chl a content was measured in the middle part of the thallus and close to the tip. On the other hand, total Chl a contents in plants exposed to PA and PAB were relatively lower compared to plants exposed to P alone. No pigment analysis was performed in the experiment using different PPD of PAR.

Pigment concentration of sporophytes incubated inside the growth chambers showed similar results. Significantly higher Chl a, Chl c^sub 1^, fucoxanthin and β-carotene (P < 0.005) levels were measured in the phylloids exposed to P alone (Fig. 7). Relative to P different pigments showed different sensitivities to PAB. The order of sensitivity of pigment, expressed as the reduction in concentration is as follows: Chl c^sub 1^, β-carotene, fucoxanthin, and Chl a with 80%, 77%, 72% and 65%, respectively. The carotenoids to Chls ratio (car: chl) showed that the P treatment (car : chl = 0.349 0.01) is not significantly different to PAB (car:chl = 0.305 0.05) (t-test, P = 0.20).

DISCUSSION

The major result of this study is that photosynthesis is able to acclimate to UVR whereas growth cannot. Acclimation of photosynthesis to UVR in brown macroalgae has been previously reported in the Arctic Laminariales (Bischof et al. 1998a, 1999). This indicates that photosynthesis is a dynamic process, which can acclimate to variations in light intensity and spectral quality (reviewed by Senger & Bauer 1987; Palkowski & LaRoche 1991). Mechanisms that might have been involved in UVR acclimation include the establishment of a physical barrier that shields the photosynthetic apparatus against damaging radiation (Karentz 1994), or the induction and synthesis of phlorotannins, which have been invoked as UV-screening compounds in brown algae (reviewed by Schoenwaelder 2002). Phlorotannins of L. ochroleuca have been previously characterized (Koch et al. 1980). However, the physiological and ecological significance of these chemically complex and heterogeneous polyphenolic components isolated from L. ochroleuca are unknown.

In contrast to photosynthesis, growth rate of L. ochroleuca has been significantly affected under longer PAB treatment. This indicates that the photosynthetic capability of the algae to partially acclimate to chronic UVR exposure cannot always be equated to the ecological optimum of the plant. Although growth (size of phylloid area) is still increasing in the P treatment, the declining slope could be attributed to the increase in doubling time for the cell mass (Sorokin 1973; Brinkhuis 1985). Field experiments on the relative growth rates of three Lamifzana J.V. Lamouroux species in Helgoland were also observed to decrease through time (Lning 1979). Consequently, regardless at which point of the growth curve we look at, the rate of increase per unit time in the young sporophytes exposed to PAB was unable to acclimate to UVR.

Although the effect of UVA was statistically insignificant in the growth experiment, it is evident that long-term exposure to UVA and UVB resulted in tissue deformation and damage in L. ochroleuca. This characteristic tissue damage and morphological deformation are still undocumented and unreported in seaweeds exposed to UVR. This is probably because previous growth studies on young Laminaria sporophytes were too short to induce tissue injury (e.g. 2-3 weeks; Dring et al. 1996b; Aguilera et al. 1999). However, pronounced tissue necrosis and loss of parts of the thalli was reported in the Arctic L. solitlungula J. Agardh after 1 week of daily exposure to 18 h UVR (Michler et al. 2002). On the other hand, UVR-induced injuries on plant's tissue have been reported in terrestrial flora. This includes reduced leaf area, blistering and epidermal deformation, lesions, increased leaf thickness and photomorphogenesis (radiation-induced change in growth form) (Cline & Salisbury 1966; Robberecht & Caldwell 1978; Tevini et al. 1981; Teramura 1983; Barnes et al. 1990). In this regard, long-term growth measurement and observation on morphological integrity of the tissue presents a more holistic indication of the negative impact of this stress factor.

Fig. 5. Growth rates of young Laminaria ochroleuca sporophytes exposed to different PFDs of PAR. Inset shows increase in surface area over time measured using a scanner and image analysis software (WinFolia). Values are x s (n = 5). ANOVA showed insignificant difference between treatments (P = 0.354).

Fig. 6. Growth, in terms of surface area increase, of young Laminaria ochmleuca sporophytes exposed to different irradiances (PAR = P; PAR + UVA + UVB = PAB) using the ISITEC growth chamber coupled to a PC with video image analysis software (MedeaLAB) determining area in pixels. PFD was 20 mol m^sup -2^ s^sup -1^. Slopes (r = rate of increase) r^sub 1^, r^sub 6^ and r^sub 12^ on days 1, 6 and 12 for P and PAB are computed using the exponential growth N^sub t^ = N^sub 0^e^sup rt^, where N^sub t^ is growth at time t and N^sub 0^ is initial size. Inset is the corresponding growth rates for the entire experimental period. Values are x s (n = 3). Letters on graph show result of West (P < 0.05); different letters refer to significant differences between mean values.

Table 3. Longitudinal profile of thallus Chl a concentration in Laminaria ochmleuca sporophytes exposed to different irradiances. Control is sample derived directly from bubbling culture; light is 10 mol m^sup -2^ S^sup -1^. Values per segment represent one replicate only.

Different growth rales were obtained from the two experimental methods. Higher growth rates in both P and PAB treatments were measured in the basin incubation system compared to the growth chamber with automated online video measuring technique. There could be several reasons for this: (1) plants in the basin are subjected to water motion which could facilitate gas exchange and nutrient uptake; (2) the higher volume of circulating water in the basin incubation system (80 litres) compared to the growth chamber (30 litres) could result in a better nutrient supply; or (3) the growth rate was light-limited in the growth chamber (P = 3.6 W m^sup -2^; PAB = 9.4 W m^sup -2^) compared to the basin incubation system (P = 8 W m^sup -2^; PAB = 18 W m^sup -2^).

In the experiment with different photon fluence rates, we were not able to test the effect of the highest total amount of light energy equivalent to the PA and PAB treatments ([congruent with] 18 W m^sup -2^). Further experiment should be conducted to address this que\stion explicitly. However, we believe that the physiological and morphological effects observed in our study are due to light quality (presence of UVR) rather than the higher amount of light energy in the UV treatments, especially because UVR cannot be used for photochemical energy conversion.

Photosynthetic and accessory pigments in L. ochroleuca were observed to react similarly with growth. These were significantly reduced under UVB. Pigment damage can result either (1) when protein- based pigments absorb UV energy directly and undergo photochemical degradation; (2) by photosensitizer action; or (3) by oxygen radical production in addition to singlet oxygen (Vincent & Neale 2000). Aguilera et al. (2002) reported that under natural solar radiation, photosynthetic pigments of six Arctic macroalgae decreased significantly upon exposure to increased PAR and UVR after seaice break-up. Reduced Chl concentrations were also observed in field experiments with Ulva Linnaeus species in Spain and Helgoland (Bischof et al. 2002b, c) and in the laboratory experiments of Australian seagrasses (Dawson & Dennison 1996). On the other hand, a study on U. rigida C. Agardh reported significantly higher pigment content (Chl a, Chl b and carotenoids) in the presence of UVB (Altamirano et al. 2000b). There was also an inverse relationship between growth and pigment content, which caused the authors to speculate some kind of photoprotective mechanism in the algae that deflects energetic resources to pigment biosynthesis at the expense of growth. In L. ochroleuca, we observed lower growth rates and pigment concentration in UVB-exposed plants. This implies that UVB reduced the synthesis of or degraded the pigments, effectively limiting the light-harvesting ability. Consequently, reduction in the photosynthetic end products also imposes constraints on the repair of cellular damage and growth. With the meagre information on the long-term effects of UVR on pigment content and its relationship to photosynthetic efficiency and growth, more studies should focus on this mechanism, which could be species-specific.

Fig. 7. Photosynthetic and accessory pigments in Laminaria ochroleuca sporophytes exposed to different irradianccs (PAR = P; PAR + UVA + UVB = PAB). Vertical bars are standard deviations (s, n = 3). Letters on graph show result of t-test (P < 0.005); different letters refer to significant differences between mean values.

The longitudinal profile of Chl a concentration in young sporophytes was comparable to those of mature L. ochroleuca (Drew et al. 1982), L. digitata (Hudson) J.V. Lamouroux, L. saccharina (Linnaeus) J.V. Lamouroux and L. Ayperborpa (Gunnerus) Foslie (Kppers & Kremer 1978). The lowest Chl a contents were measured in the young and merislematic regions of the plant. Tissue Chl a concentration increases with age, but the tip contains relatively lower amounts than the middle parts. Furthermore, different pigments were observed to exhibit different sensitivities to UVR. For example, within the Chls, Chl c^sub 1^ has been found to be more sensitive than Chl a. The carotcnoids fucoxanthin and β- carotcne were more affected than the Chls (Chl a + Chl c^sub 1^) under UVB. These observations conflict with previous studies, where it was reported that Chl a was more sensitive than Chl b (Teramura 1983; Strid et al. 1990) and that carotenoids are generally less affected than Chls (Teramura 1983). Therefore, an increase in car:chl due to faster degradation of Chls can imply some photoprotection role of carotenoids (Roy 2000). However, the accumulation of carotenoids specifically in response to UVR was only observed in cyanobacteria and chlorophytes (Buckley & Houghton 1976; Goes et al. 1994). In our study, car: chl was more or less the same in plants exposed to P alone and plants exposed to PAB.

In the field, the wide range of distribution of L. ochroleuca across a vertical gradient (0-100 m) suggests that competent spores and germlings can successfully recruit across the expanse of the vertical tidal zone. However, young sporophytes are probably prevented from growing successfully into adult sporophytes in the upper tide level by consistent exposure to environmental stress such as high UVR, temperature changes, desiccation and grazing. This could explain the low relative plant density reported at 0-2 m zone in the field. Although there were no previous field data on UVR in these areas, much lower plant densities were observed in the Spanish and French coasts (John 1971; Sheppard et al. 1978) compared to the estuarine area in Spain (John 1971). Because of the higher solar angle, lower latitude areas receive more solar radiation, and higher harmful UVB levels have been reported in Spain than in polar regions or higher latitudes (Altamirano et al. 2000a, b). Also, macrophytes are more affected by UVR in clear waters than in turbid waters because excessive UV can be absorbed and scattered in the water column by suspended matter, dissolved organic carbon and phytoplankton.

In conclusion, we recommend that future studies on the long-term effect of increasing UVR on aquatic macrophytes should measure growth rather than photosynthesis only, or preferably measure both physiological processes and other biochemical parameters, to understand better the mechanisms of UV damage in macroalgae. It has been demonstrated that photosynthesis is an important physiological target of UVR (Franklin & Forster 1997; Hanelt et al. 1997c; Bischof et al. 1998a). However, fluorescence data showed that photosynthesis was negatively affected only during the initial exposure to UVR and eventually acclimated to it. Conversely, long-term chronic exposure to UVR showed a significant effect on growth rate, the tissue's morphological integrity and pigment composition. Other cellular processes affected by UVR are cell division, and damage to macromolecules such as DNA, proteins and lipids (Altamirano et al. 2000a, b; van de Poll et al. 2001). UV exposure reduces the accumulation of photosynthetic products, which are diverted to the repair of cellular damage and consequently limit growth and reproduction. In this regard, growth as an integrative cellular process is better suited than photosynthesis to the study of the long-term effect of UV exposure to macroalgae.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank J.L. Izquierdo for bringing fertile L. ochroleuca material to Biologische Anstalt Helgoland and A. Wagner for providing the stock gametophytes and young sporophytes material. F. de los Reyes was consulted for statistical analysis. We also thank the two anonymous referees for their constructive comments. The first author is supported by a scholarship from the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

M.Y. ROLEDA, D. HANELT, G. KRBS AND C. WIENCKE. 2004. Morphology, growth, photosynthesis and pigments in Laminaria ochroleuca (Laminariales, Phaeophyta) under ultraviolet radiation. Phycologia 43: 603-613.

REFERENCES

AGUILERA J., KARSTEN U., LIPPERT H., VGELE B., PHILIPP E., HANELT D. & WIENCKE C. 1999. Effects of solar radiation on growth, photosynthesis and respiration of marine macroalgae from the Arctic. Marine Ecology Progress Series 191: 109-119.

AGUILERA J., BISCHOF K., KARSTEN U., HANELT D. & WIENCKE C. 2002. Seasonal variation in ecophysiological patterns in macroalgae from an Arctic fjord. II. Pigment accumulation and biochemical defence systems against high light stress. Marine Biology 140: 1087-1095.

ALTAMIRANO M., FLORES-MOYA A. & FIGUEROA F.-L. 2000a. Long-term effects of natural sunlight under various ultraviolet radiation conditions on growth and photosynthesis of intertidal Ulva rigida (Chlorophyceae) cultivated in situ. Botanica Marina 43: 19-26.

ALTAMIRANO M., FLORES-MOYA A. & FIGUEROA F.-L. 2000b. Growth, seasonality, photosynthetic pigments, and C and N content in relation to environmental factors: a field study on Ulva olivascens (Ulvales, Chlorophyta). Phycologia 39: 50-58.

ALTAMIRANO M., FLORES-MOYA A. & FIGUEROA F.-L. 2003. Effects of UV radiation and temperature on growth of germlings of three species of Fucus (Phaeophycea). Aquatic Botany 75: 9-20.

BAARES E., ALTAMIRANO M., FIGUEROA F.-L. & FLORES-MOYA A. 2002. Influence of UV radiation on growth of sporelings of three non- geniculate coralline red algae from southern Iberian Peninsula. Phycological Research 50: 23-30.

BARNES P.W., FLINT S.D. & CALDWELL M.M. 1990. Morphological responses of crop and weed species of different growth forms to ultraviolet-B radiation. American Journal of Botany 77: 1354-1360.

BENHISSOUNE S., BOUDOURESQUE C.-F. & VERLAQUE M. 2002. A checklist of the seaweeds of the Mediterranean and Atlantic Coasts of Morocco. II. Phaeophyceae. Botanica Marina 45: 217-230.

BISCHOF K., HANELT D. & WIENCKE C. 1998a. UV-radiation can affect depth-zonation of Antarctic macroalgae. Marine Biology 131: 597- 605.

BISCHOF K., HANELT D., TG, H., RARSTEN U., BROUWER P.E.M. & WIENCKE C. 1998b. Acclimation of brown algal photosynthesis to ultraviolet radiation in Arctic coastal waters (Spitsbergen, Norway). Polar Biology 20: 388-395.

BISCHOF K., HANELT D. & WIENCKE C. 1999. Acclimation of maximal quantum yield of photosynthesis in the brown alga Maria esculenta under high light and UV radiation. Plant Biology 1: 435-444.

BISCHOF K., HANELT D. & WIENCKE C. 2001. UV-radiation and Arctic marine macroalgae. In: UV-radiation and Arctic ecosystems (Ed. by D. Hessen), pp. 227-244. Springer, New York. [Ecological Studies Series, vol. 153.]

BISCHOF K., HANELT D., AGUILERA J., KARSTEN U., VGELE B., SAWALL T. & WIENCKE C. 2002a. Seasonal variation in ecophysiological patterns in macroalgae from an Arctic fjord. I. Sensitivity of photosynthesis to ultraviolet radiation. Marine Biology 140: 1097- 1106.

BISCHOF K., PERALTA G., KRBS G., VAN DE POLL W.H., PREZLLORNS J.C. & BREEMAN A.M. 2002b. Effects of solar UV-B radiation on canopy structure of Ulva communities from southernSpain. Journal of Experimental Botany 53: 2411-2421.

BISCHOF K., KRBS G., WIENCKE C. & HANELT D. 2002c. Solar ultraviolet radiation affects the activity of ribulose-1,5- biphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase and the composition of photosynthetic and xanthophyll cycle pigments in the intertidal green alga Ulva lactuca L. Planta 215: 502-509.

BRINKHUIS B.H. 1985. Growth patterns and rates. In: Handbook of phycological methods: ecological field methods: macrolagae (Ed. by M.M. Littler & D.S. Littler), pp. 461-477. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

BUCKLEY C.E. & HOUGHTON J.A. 1976. A study of the effects of near UV radiation on the pigmentation of the blue-green alga Gloeocapsa alpicola. Archives of Microbiology 107: 93-97.

CLINE M.G. & SALISBURY F.B. 1966. Effects of ultraviolet radiation on the leaves of higher plants. Radiation Botany 6: 151- 163.

DAWSON S.P. & DENNISON W.C. 1996. Effects of ultraviolet and photosynthetically active radiation on five seagrass species. Marine Biology 125: 629-638.

DEMMIG-ADAMS B. & ADAMS W.W. III. 1992. Photoprotection and other responses of plants to high light stress. Annual Review of Plant Physiology & Plant Molecular Biology 43: 599-626.

DREW E.A. 1972. Growth of a kelp forest at 60 metres in the Straits of Messina. Memorie di Biologia Marina e di Oceanografia 2: 135-157.

DREW E.A. 1974. An ecological study of Laminaria ochroleuca Pyl. growing below 50 metres in the Straits of Messina. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 15: 11-24.

DREW E.A., IRELAND J.F., MUIR C., ROBERTSON W.A.A. & ROBINSON J.D. 1982. Photosynthesis, respiration and other factors influencing the growth of Laminaria ochroleuca Pyl. below 50 metres in the Straits of Messina. Marine Ecology - Pubblicazioni Della Stazione Zoologica di Napoli I 3: 335-355.

DRING M.J., WAGNER A., BOESKOV J. & LNING K. 1996a. Sensitivity of intcrtidal and sublidal red algae to UVA and UVB radiation, as monitored by chlorophyll fluorescence measurements: influence of collection depth and season, and length of irradiation. European Journal of Phycology 31: 293-302.

DRING M.S., MAKAROV V., SCHOSCHINA E., LORENZ M. & LNING K. 1996b. Influence of ultraviolet-radiation on chlorophyll fluorescence and growth in different life-history stages of three species of Laminaria (Phaeophyta). Marine Biology 126: 183-191.

DRING M.J., WAGNER A. & LNING K. 2001. Contribution of the UV component of natural sunlight to photoinhibition of photosynthesis in six species of subtidal brown and red seaweeds. Plant, Cell & Environment 24: 1153-1164.

FALKOWSKI P.G. & LAROCHE J. 1991. Acclimation to spectral irradiance in algae. Journal of Phycology 27: 8-14.

FLORES-MOYA A., GMEZ I., VIEGLA B., ALTAMIRANO M., PREZ- RODRIGUEZ E., MAESTRE C., CABALLERO R.M. & FIGUEROA F.-L. 1998. Effects of solar radiation on the endemic Mediterranean red alga Rissoella verruculosa: photosynthetic performance, pigment content and the activities of enzymes related to nutrient uptake. New Phytologist 139: 673-683.

FRANKLIN L.A. & FORSTER R.M. 1997. The changing irradiance environment: consequences for marine macrophyte physiology, productivily and ecology. European Journal of Phycology 32: 207- 232.

GOES J.I., HANDA N., TAGUCHI S. & HAMA T. 1994. Effect of UV-B radiation on the fatty acid composition of the marine phytoplankter Tetraselmis sp.: relationship to cellular pigments. Marine Ecology Progress Series 114: 259-274.

GMEZ I., FIGUEROA F.-L., SOUSA-PINTO I., VIEGLA B., PREZ- RODRGUEZ E., MAESTRE C., COELHO S., FELGA A. & PEREIRA R. 2001. Effects of UV radiation and temperature on photosynthesis as measured by PAM flourescence in the red alga Gelidium pulchellum (Turner) Ktzing. Botanica Marina 44: 9-16.

HDER D.-P., PORST M. & LEBERT M. 2001. Photosynthetic performance of the Atlantic brown macroalgae, Cystoseira abies-marina, Dictyota dichotoma and Sargassum vulgare, measured in Gran Canaria on site. Environmental and Experimental Botany 45: 21-32.

HANELT D. 1998. Capability of dynamic photoinhibition in Arctic macroalgae is related to their depth distribution. Marine Biology 131: 361-369.

HANELT D., MELCHERSMANN B., WIENCKE C. & NULTSCH W. 1997a. Effects of high light stress on photosynthesis of polar macroalgae in relation to depth distribution. Marine Ecology Progress Series 149: 255-266.

HANELT D., WIENCKE C., KARSTEN U. & NULTSCH W. 1997b. Photoinhibition and recovery after high light stress in different developmental and life-history stages of Laminaria saccharina (Phaeophyta). Journal of Phycology 33: 387-395.

HANELT D., WIENCKE C. & NULTSCH W. 1997c. Influence of UV- radiatton on the photosynthesis of Arctic macroalage in the field. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology 38: 40-47.

HUOVINEN P.S., OIKARI A.O.J., SOIMASUO M.R. & CHERR G.N. 2000. Impact of UV radiation on the early development of the giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) gametophytes. Photochemistry and Photobiology 72: 308-313.

IZQUIERDO J.L., PREZ-RUZAFA LM. & GALLARDO T. 2001. Effect of temperature and photon fluence rate on gametophytes and young sporophytes of Latninaria ochroleuca Pylaie. Helgoland Marine Research 55: 285-292.

JERLOV N.G. 1976. Marine optics, ed. 2. Elsevier Scientific, Amsterdam. 231 pp.

JIMNEZ C., FIGUEROA F.-L., SALLES S., AGUILERA J., MERCADO J., VIEOLA B., FLORES-MOYA A., LEBERT M. & HADER D.-P. 1998. Effects of solar radiation on photosynthesis and photoinhibition in red macrophytes from an intertidal system of southern Spain. Botanica Marina 41: 329-338.

JOHN D.M. 1969. An ecological study on Laminaria ochroleuca. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 49: 175-187.

JOHN D.M. 1971. The distribution and net productivity of sublittoral populations of attached macrophytic algae in an estuary on the Atlantic coast of Spain. Marine Biology 11: 90-97.

KARENTZ D. 1994. Ultraviolet tolerance mechanisms in Antarctic marine organisms. In: Ultraviolet radiation in Antarctica: measurements and biological effects (Ed. by C.S. Weiler & P.A. Penhale), pp. 93-110. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC. [Antarctic Research Series no. 62.]

KOCH M., GLOMBITZA K.-W. & ECKHARDT G. 1980. Phlorotannins of Phaeophycea Laminaria ochroleuca. Photochemistry 19: 1821-1823.

KPPERS U. & KREMER B.P. 1978. Longitudinal profiles of carbon dioxide fixation capacities in marine macroalgae. Plant Physiology 62: 49-53.

LNING K. 1979. Growth strategies of three Laminaria species (Phaeophyceae) inhabiting different depth zones in the sublittoral region of Helgoland (North Sea). Marine Ecology Progress Series 1: 195-207.

MAKAROV M.V. & VOSKOHOINIKOV G.M. 2001. The influence of Ultraviolet-B radiation on spore release and growth of the kelp Laminaria saccharina. Botanica Marina 44: 89-94.

MICHLER T, AOUILERA J., HANELT D., BISCHOF K. & WIENCKE C. 2002. Long-term effects of ultraviolet radiation on growth and photosynthetic performance of polar and cold-temperate macroalgae. Marine Biology 140: 1117-1127.

OHAD I., KYLE D.J. & ARNTZEN C.J. 1984. Membrane protein damage and repair: removal and replacement of inactivated 32-kilodalton polypeplides in chloroplast membranes. Journal of Cell Biology 99: 481-485.

OSMOND C.B. 1994. What is photoinhibition? Some insights from comparisons of shade and sun plains. In: Photoinhihition of photosynthesis, from the molecular mechanisms to the field (Ed. by N.R. Baker & J.R. Bowyer), pp. 1-24. BIOS Scientific, Oxford, UK.

PEARCE F. 1996. Big freeze digs a deeper hole in ozone layer. New Scientist 147: 7.

PREZ-RODRGUEZ E., GMEZ I., KARSTEN U. & FIGUEROA F.-L. 1998. Effects of UV-radiation on photosynthesis and excretion of UV- absorbing compounds of Dasycladus vermictilaris (Dasycladales, Chlorophyta) from southern Spain. Phycologia 37: 379-387.

PRICE J.H., JOHN D.M. & LAWSON G. W. 1978. Seaweeds of the western coast of tropical Africa and adjacent islands: a critical assessment. II. Phaeophyta. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Botany 6: 87-182.

PROVASOLI L. 1968. Media and prospects for the cultivation of marine algae. In: Cultures and collections of algae. Proceedings of US-Japan conference, Hakone, 1966 (Ed. by A. Watanabe & A. Hattore), pp. 63-75. Japanese Society for Plant Physiology, Tokyo.

REED D.C., AMSLER C.D. & EBELING A.W. 1992. Dispersal in kelps: factors affecting spore swimming and competency. Ecology 73: 1577- 1585.

RIBERA M.A., GMEZ-GARRETA A., GALLARDO T., CORMACI M., FURNARI G. & GIACCONE G. 1992. Check-list of Mediterranean seaweeds. I. Fucophyceae (Warming 1884). Botanica Marina 35: 109-130.

ROBBERECHT R. & CALDWELL M.M. 1978. Leaf epidermal transmittance of ultraviolet radiation and its implications for plant sensitivity to ultraviolet-radiation induced injury. Oecologia 32: 277-287.

ROY S. 2000. Strategies for the minimisation of UV-induced damage. In: The effects of UV radiation in the marine environment (Ed. by S. de Mora, S. Deniers & M. Vernet), pp. 177-205. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

SCHOENWAELDER M.E.A. 2002. The occurrence and cellular significance of physodes in brown algae. Phycologia 41: 125-139.

SENGER H. & BAUER B. 1987. The influence of light quality on adaptation and function of the photosynthetic apparatus. Photochemistry and Photobiology 45: 939-946.

SHEPPARD C.R.C., JUPP B.P., SHEPPARD A.L.S. & BELLAMY D.J. 1978. Studies on the growth of Laminaria hyperborea (Gunn.) Fosl. and Laminaria ochroleuca De La Pylaie on the French Channel Coast. Botanica Marina 21: 109-116.

SMITH R.C., PRZELIN B.B., BAKER K.S., BIDIGARE R.R., BOUCHER N.P., COLEY T., KARENTZ D., MACINTYRE S., MATLICK H.A., MENZIES D., ONDRUSEK M., WAN Z. & WATERS K.J. 1992. Ozone depletion: ultraviolet radiation and phytoplankton biology in Antarctic waters. Science 255: 952-959.

SOROKIN C. 1973. Dry weight, packed cell volume and optical density. In: Handbook of phycological methods: culture methods and growth measurements (Ed. by J.\R. Stein), pp. 321-343. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

STRID ., CHOW W.S. & ANDERSON J.M. 1990. Effects of supplementary ultraviolet-B radiation on photosynthesis in Pisum sativum. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1020: 260-268.

TERAMURA A.H. 1983. Effects of ultraviolet-B radiation on the growth and yield of crop plants. Physiologia Plantarum 58: 415-427.

TRVINI M., IWANZIK W. & THOMA U. 1981. Some effects of enhanced UV-B on the growth and composition of plants. Planta 153: 388-394.

VAN DE POLL W.H., EGGERT A., BUMA A.G.J. & BREEMAN A.M. 2001. Effects of UV-B-induced DNA damage and photoinhibition on growth of temperate marine red macrophytes: habitat-related differences in UV- B tolerance. Journal of Phycology 37: 30-37.

VINCENT W.F. & NEALE P.J. 2000. Mechanisms of UV damage to aquatic organisms. In: The effects of UV radiation in the marine environment (Ed. by S. de Mora, S. Demers & M. Vernet), pp. 149- 176. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

WIENCKE C., BARTSCH I., BISCHOFF B., PETERS A.F. & BREEMAN A.M. 1994. Temperature requirements and biogeography of Antarctic, Arctic and amphiequatorial seaweeds. Botanica Marina 37: 247-259.

WIENCKE C., GMEZ I., PAKKER H., FLORES-MOYA A., ALTAMIRANO M., HANELT D., BISCHOF K. & FIGUEROA F-L. 2000. Impact of UV-radiation on viability, photosynthetic characteristics and DNA of brown algal zoospores: implications for depth zonation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 197: 217-229.

YABE K., MAKINO M. & SUSUKI M. 1997. Growth-inhibition on gametophytes of Laminaria religiosa induced by UV-B radiation. Fisheries Science 63: 668-670.

Received 9 June 2003; accepted 14 May 2004

Communicating editor: T. Motomura

MICHAEL Y. RoLEDA1,2*, DIETER HANELT1, GUDRUN KRBS3 AND CHRISTIAN WiENCKE3

1 Biologische Anstalt Helgoland, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Helgoland, D-27498, Germany

2 Biology Department, De La Salle University, 2401 Taft Avenue, 1004 Manila, Philippines

3 Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, Bremerhaven 27570, Germany

* Corresponding author (mroleda@awi-bremerhaven.de).

Copyright International Phycological Society Sep 2004

Source: Phycologia

More News in this Category