Could Discovery of New Chlorophyll Give Plants the (Red) Edge in Solar Race?
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 02. 5.08
Image courtesy of tamhistory1 via flickr
It may not have the same zesty appeal as the human genome sequencing project - or, heck, even that of the common fruit fly - but the recent sequencing of Acaryochloris marina, a cyanobacterium that appears in the South Pacific, could have comparably significant ramifications for the life sciences - and solar energy. In so doing, the international team of researchers discovered the presence of chlorophyll d, an extremely rare form of chlorophyll that allows the cyanobacterium to absorb light in the near IR region, or "red edge."
They believe Acaryochloris is unique in this respect; as a result, it holds a huge competitive advantage over other plants and bacteria that photosynthesize primarily by using chlorophyll a and b. Led by Robert Blankenship of the Washington University in St. Louis, the scientists are now hard at work finding the enzyme that causes the chemical structure change in chlorophyll d. They will insert several candidate genes into organisms that produce only chlorophyll a - the underlying reasoning being that any organism that then synthesizes chlorophyll d will have done so with the help of one of the genes.
Such a finding could potentially revolutionize the production of solar energy: According to Blankenship, it might become possible to harvest solar power through plants or other photosynthetic organisms by genetically modifying them with the chlorophyll d gene. This could lead to the creation of solar power "factories" that are able to make and store large amounts of solar energy:
"Consider a seven-foot tall corn plant genetically tailored with the chlorophyll d gene to be expressed at the very base of the stalk. While the rest of the plant synthesized chlorophyll a, absorbing short wave light, the base is absorbing “red edge” light in the 710 nanometer range. Energy could be stored in the base without competing with any other part of the plant for photosynthesis, as the rest only makes chlorophyll a."
The larger implications of this for the renewable energy industry would be substantial: Genetically altered biofuel crops, which would boast much more efficient rates of photosynthesis, could become enormous repositories of energy and provide a viable alternative source.
See also: ::Tiny Quantum Computers in Bacteria = Efficient Solar Power, ::Solar Tree Hits the Streets, and Passes the Test
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- What have we learned from the Human Genome Project?
- Robert Waterston
- 1 GW Solar Power Project Announced in China, Timetable Unknown
- Is Toyota Hot on the Trail of a Solar Powered Car?
A more science literate person could elaborate on this but, I thought the majority of plants were green because if they absorbed all the available light they would burn themselves out.
It would seem that this is a good development for solar energy, but it's nothing special for plants as it's better for them to not synthesize the entire spectrum of light.
@some dude
No. It's not possible for them to synthesize the entire spectrum as the two common forms of chlorophyll have specific discrete absorption spectra. If they could, they would, as it's hugely advantageous.
I dunno about burn out or if using all three chlorophylls (side note what happened to c; it goes a, b, d) would be best. However, for biofuel purposes it would not matter if the algea burn themselves out since they would be harvested quickly, their genomes would not be tailored to success in the 'wild' but to a very specific human-centric purpose. So, I would think we could tinker with spectrum absorbtion ranges as much as we want. Heck, eventually we could tailor these algea, or whatevber biofuel plant we engineer, to abosorb all spectrums of radiation.
"Burning themselves out" is a very well stated point.
Or will we burn ourselves out, before we realize that there are a huge number of solutions and amazing aplications of nature "as is".
I take this (and other) news with somewhat sadness.
On one hand, all of this "amazing" scientific developments are all so exciting and seem to make our lives everyday better.
On the other hand, we are mixing with, further more, the foundations of live itself. Undermining it?
I would applaude all the scientific developments we witness today. Only they stand for a sad truth: "We don't know how to manage nature and Earth has it is, we want to "outsmart" everything, and we realy don't have a clue on what this would all lead."