Cargando…

Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass

Excitation energy transfer in monomeric and trimeric forms of photosystem I (PSI) from the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 in solution or immobilized on FTO conducting glass was compared using time-resolved fluorescence. Deposition of PSI on glass preserves bi-exponential excitation decay...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Szewczyk, Sebastian, Giera, Wojciech, D’Haene, Sandrine, van Grondelle, Rienk, Gibasiewicz, Krzysztof
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27696181
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11120-016-0312-4
_version_ 1782520861745479680
author Szewczyk, Sebastian
Giera, Wojciech
D’Haene, Sandrine
van Grondelle, Rienk
Gibasiewicz, Krzysztof
author_facet Szewczyk, Sebastian
Giera, Wojciech
D’Haene, Sandrine
van Grondelle, Rienk
Gibasiewicz, Krzysztof
author_sort Szewczyk, Sebastian
collection PubMed
description Excitation energy transfer in monomeric and trimeric forms of photosystem I (PSI) from the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 in solution or immobilized on FTO conducting glass was compared using time-resolved fluorescence. Deposition of PSI on glass preserves bi-exponential excitation decay of ~4–7 and ~21–25 ps lifetimes characteristic of PSI in solution. The faster phase was assigned in part to photochemical quenching (charge separation) of excited bulk chlorophylls and in part to energy transfer from bulk to low-energy (red) chlorophylls. The slower phase was assigned to photochemical quenching of the excitation equilibrated over bulk and red chlorophylls. The main differences between dissolved and immobilized PSI (iPSI) are: (1) the average excitation decay in iPSI is about 11 ps, which is faster by a few ps than for PSI in solution due to significantly faster excitation quenching of bulk chlorophylls by charge separation (~10 ps instead of ~15 ps) accompanied by slightly weaker coupling of bulk and red chlorophylls; (2) the number of red chlorophylls in monomeric PSI increases twice—from 3 in solution to 6 after immobilization—as a result of interaction with neighboring monomers and conducting glass; despite the increased number of red chlorophylls, the excitation decay accelerates in iPSI; (3) the number of red chlorophylls in trimeric PSI is 4 (per monomer) and remains unchanged after immobilization; (4) in all the samples under study, the free energy gap between mean red (emission at ~710 nm) and mean bulk (emission at ~686 nm) emitting states of chlorophylls was estimated at a similar level of 17–27 meV. All these observations indicate that despite slight modifications, dried PSI complexes adsorbed on the FTO surface remain fully functional in terms of excitation energy transfer and primary charge separation that is particularly important in the view of photovoltaic applications of this photosystem.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5387024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53870242017-04-27 Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass Szewczyk, Sebastian Giera, Wojciech D’Haene, Sandrine van Grondelle, Rienk Gibasiewicz, Krzysztof Photosynth Res Original Article Excitation energy transfer in monomeric and trimeric forms of photosystem I (PSI) from the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 in solution or immobilized on FTO conducting glass was compared using time-resolved fluorescence. Deposition of PSI on glass preserves bi-exponential excitation decay of ~4–7 and ~21–25 ps lifetimes characteristic of PSI in solution. The faster phase was assigned in part to photochemical quenching (charge separation) of excited bulk chlorophylls and in part to energy transfer from bulk to low-energy (red) chlorophylls. The slower phase was assigned to photochemical quenching of the excitation equilibrated over bulk and red chlorophylls. The main differences between dissolved and immobilized PSI (iPSI) are: (1) the average excitation decay in iPSI is about 11 ps, which is faster by a few ps than for PSI in solution due to significantly faster excitation quenching of bulk chlorophylls by charge separation (~10 ps instead of ~15 ps) accompanied by slightly weaker coupling of bulk and red chlorophylls; (2) the number of red chlorophylls in monomeric PSI increases twice—from 3 in solution to 6 after immobilization—as a result of interaction with neighboring monomers and conducting glass; despite the increased number of red chlorophylls, the excitation decay accelerates in iPSI; (3) the number of red chlorophylls in trimeric PSI is 4 (per monomer) and remains unchanged after immobilization; (4) in all the samples under study, the free energy gap between mean red (emission at ~710 nm) and mean bulk (emission at ~686 nm) emitting states of chlorophylls was estimated at a similar level of 17–27 meV. All these observations indicate that despite slight modifications, dried PSI complexes adsorbed on the FTO surface remain fully functional in terms of excitation energy transfer and primary charge separation that is particularly important in the view of photovoltaic applications of this photosystem. Springer Netherlands 2016-10-01 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5387024/ /pubmed/27696181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11120-016-0312-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Szewczyk, Sebastian
Giera, Wojciech
D’Haene, Sandrine
van Grondelle, Rienk
Gibasiewicz, Krzysztof
Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title_full Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title_fullStr Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title_short Comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem I in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
title_sort comparison of excitation energy transfer in cyanobacterial photosystem i in solution and immobilized on conducting glass
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27696181
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11120-016-0312-4
work_keys_str_mv AT szewczyksebastian comparisonofexcitationenergytransferincyanobacterialphotosystemiinsolutionandimmobilizedonconductingglass
AT gierawojciech comparisonofexcitationenergytransferincyanobacterialphotosystemiinsolutionandimmobilizedonconductingglass
AT dhaenesandrine comparisonofexcitationenergytransferincyanobacterialphotosystemiinsolutionandimmobilizedonconductingglass
AT vangrondellerienk comparisonofexcitationenergytransferincyanobacterialphotosystemiinsolutionandimmobilizedonconductingglass
AT gibasiewiczkrzysztof comparisonofexcitationenergytransferincyanobacterialphotosystemiinsolutionandimmobilizedonconductingglass