Γ* values obtained from our own measurements were, 21.3 and 37.0 mol mol−1 for 10 and 22 °C respectively. Values for in vivo Rubisco kinetics parameters k c and k o , 40.1 Pa and 27.59 kPa at 25 °C, and their {Selleck Anti-infection Compound Library|Selleck Antiinfection Compound Library|Selleck Anti-infection Compound Library|Selleck Antiinfection Compound Library|Selleckchem Anti-infection Compound Library|Selleckchem Antiinfection Compound Library|Selleckchem Anti-infection Compound Library|Selleckchem Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library|buy Anti-infection Compound Library|Anti-infection Compound Library ic50|Anti-infection Compound Library price|Anti-infection Compound Library cost|Anti-infection Compound Library solubility dmso|Anti-infection Compound Library purchase|Anti-infection Compound Library manufacturer|Anti-infection Compound Library research buy|Anti-infection Compound Library order|Anti-infection Compound Library mouse|Anti-infection Compound Library chemical structure|Anti-infection Compound Library mw|Anti-infection Compound Library molecular weight|Anti-infection Compound Library datasheet|Anti-infection Compound Library supplier|Anti-infection Compound Library in vitro|Anti-infection Compound Library cell line|Anti-infection Compound Library concentration|Anti-infection Compound Library nmr|Anti-infection Compound Library in vivo|Anti-infection Compound Library clinical trial|Anti-infection Compound Library cell assay|Anti-infection Compound Library screening|Anti-infection Compound Library high throughput|buy Antiinfection Compound Library|Antiinfection Compound Library ic50|Antiinfection Compound Library price|Antiinfection Compound Library cost|Antiinfection Compound Library solubility dmso|Antiinfection Compound Library purchase|Antiinfection Compound Library manufacturer|Antiinfection Compound Library research buy|Antiinfection Compound Library order|Antiinfection Compound Library chemical structure|Antiinfection Compound Library datasheet|Antiinfection Compound Library supplier|Antiinfection Compound Library in vitro|Antiinfection Compound Library cell line|Antiinfection Compound Library concentration|Antiinfection Compound Library clinical trial|Antiinfection Compound Library cell assay|Antiinfection Compound Library screening|Antiinfection Compound Library high throughput|Anti-infection Compound high throughput screening| temperature dependence were obtained LBH589 order from Bernacchi et al. (2002). Distinction between V Cmax limited, J max limited and TPU limited C i trajectories was done by eye. The model was fitted to the data using the solver module in Excel 2007 for the V Cmax and J max limited

C i ranges only. Electron transport rate (ETR) was calculated according to Genty et al. (1989) from the photochemical efficiency in the light (\( \varphi_\textII = \Updelta F/F_\textm^\prime \)) Selleck Vistusertib as measured by chlorophyll fluorescence, photon flux density

(PFD) and leaf absorptance (abs) as ETR = φ II PFD abs 0.5. Absorptance was estimated from the chlorophyll content (chl) as abs = chl/(chl + 76) (Evans and Poorter 2001). Data are presented as means with standard deviation (SE). The SE was calculated as the standard deviation divided by the square root of the sample size (n). Further statistical analysis was by three-way ANOVA using accession, growth temperature and growth irradiance as fixed factors (SPSS 18.0). All variables were log10 transformed prior to analysis in order to investigate relative effects and to obtain a better homogeneity of variances. Only Protirelin variables that were already relative expressions were not transformed (chlorophyll a/b ratio, C i /C a ratio, and O2 sensitivity of A growth and ETR). Results and discussion The two Arabidopsis accessions showed remarkably similar responses to growth temperature and irradiance for many of the variables (Table 1). Therefore, the comparison between the accessions is addressed at the end of this section, where also possible implications for climate adaptation are discussed. Table 1 Results of a 3-way ANOVA for variables shown in the Figures and Table 2   Accession Temp. Light A × T A × L T × L A × T × L Fig. 1  A sat/LA

10 °C 7.4* 320*** 934*** 1.9ns 0.0ns 0.8ns 0.8ns  A sat/LA 22 °C 0.0ns 79.9*** 403*** 0.5ns 0.4ns 18.7*** 0.9ns  A growth/LA 10 °C 5.8* 213*** 1162*** 0.2ns 0.9ns 13.1** 0.4ns  A growth/LA 22 °C 3.2ns 10.1** 1855*** 0.3ns 0.0ns 2.4ns 0.1ns  ETR/LA Lgrowth 10 °C 4.5* 138*** 5062*** 9.0** 0.9ns 26.1*** 0.7ns  ETR/LA Lgrowth 22 °C 3.0ns 21.4*** 17965*** 8.5** 3.9ns 2.9ns 0.1ns  ETR/LA Lsat 10 °C 2.0ns 140*** 660*** 6.1* 1.2ns 0.4ns 0.3ns  ETR/LA Lsat 22 °C 0.6ns 90*** 977*** 7.3* 0.7ns 8.8** 0.1ns Fig. 3  V Cmax/Rubisco 10 °C 0.5ns 6.1* 26.7*** 0.9ns 5.9* 0.1ns 0.0ns  V Cmax/Rubisco 22 °C 0.5ns 1.0ns 43.5*** 2.5ns 11.0** 6.4* 0.1ns Fig. 4                C i at co-limitation 22 °C 0.6ns 5.9ns 3.0ns 0.6ns 1.2ns 50.7*** 0.2 Fig.