Photodamage to Oxygen Evolving Complex - An Initial Event in Photoinhibition of Photosystem II.

Photosystem II (PSII) of oxygenic photosynthesis is susceptible to photoinhibition. Photoinhibition is defined as light induced damage resulting in turnover of the D1 protein subunit of the reaction center of PSII. Both visible and ultraviolet (UV) light cause photoinhibition. Photoinhibition induced by UV light damages the oxygen evolving complex (OEC) via absorption of UV photons by the Mn ion(s) of OEC. Under visible light, most of the earlier hypotheses assume that photoinhibition occurs when the rate of photon absorption by PSII antenna exceeds the use of the absorbed energy in photosynthesis. However, photoinhibition occurs at all light intensities with the same efficiency per photon. The aim of my thesis work was to build a model of photoinhibition that fits the experimental features of photoinhibition. I studied the role of electron transfer reactions of PSII in photoinhibition and found that changing the electron transfer rate had only minor influence on photoinhibition if light intensity was kept constant. Furthermore, quenching of antenna excitations protected less efficiently than it would protect if antenna chlorophylls were the only photoreceptors of photoinhibition. To identify photoreceptors of photoinhibition, I measured the action spectrum of photoinhibition. The action spectrum showed resemblance to the absorption spectra of Mn model compounds suggesting that the Mn cluster of OEC acts as a photoreceptor of photoinhibition under visible light, too. The role of Mn in photoinhibition was further supported by experiments showing that during photoinhibition OEC is damaged before electron transfer activity at the acceptor side of PSII is lost. Mn enzymes were found to be photosensitive under visible and UV light indicating that Mn-containing compounds, including OEC, are capable of functioning as photosensitizers both in visible and UV light. The experimental results above led to the Mn hypothesis of the mechanism of continuous-light-induced photoinhibition. According to the Mn hypothesis, excitation of Mn of OEC results in inhibition of electron donation from OEC to the oxidized primary donor P680+ both under UV and visible light. P680 is oxidized by photons absorbed by chlorophyll, and if not reduced by OEC, P680+ may cause harmful oxidation of other PSII components. Photoinhibition was also induced with intense laser pulses and it was found that the photoinhibitory efficiency increased in proportion to the square of pulse intensity suggesting that laser-pulse-induced photoinhibition is a two-photon reaction. I further developed the Mn hypothesis suggesting that the initial event in photoinhibition under both continuous and pulsed light is the same: Mn excitation that leads to the inhibition of electron donation from OEC to P680+. Under laser-pulse-illumination, another Mn-mediated inhibitory photoreaction occurs within the duration of the same pulse, whereas under continuous light, secondary damage is chlorophyll mediated. A mathematical model based on the Mn hypothesis was found to explain photoinhibition under continuous light, under flash illumination and under the combination of these two.

Free Flap Monitoring. Using Tissue Oxygen Measurement and Positron Emission Tomography

Aims:This study was carried out to evaluate the feasibility of two different methods to determine free flap perfusion in cancer patients undergoing major reconstructive surgery. The hypotheses was that low perfusion in the flap is associated with flap complications. Patients and methods: Between August 2002 and June 2008 at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, and at the PET Centre, Turku, 30 consecutive patients with 32 free flaps were included in this study. The perfusion of the free microvascular flaps was assessed with positron emission tomography (PET) and radioactive water ([¹⁵O] H₂O) in 40 radiowater injections in 33 PET studies. Furthermore, 24 free flaps were monitored with a continuous tissue oxygen measurement using flexible polarographic catheters for an average of three postoperative days. Results: Of the 17 patients operated on for head and neck (HN) cancer and reconstructed with 18 free flaps, three re-operations were carried out due to poor tissue oxygenation as indicated by p_tiO₂ monitoring results and three other patients were reoperated on for postoperative hematomas in the operated area. Blood perfusion assessed with PET (BF_PET) was above 2.0 mL / min / 100 g in all flaps and a low flap-to-muscle BFPET ratio appeared to correlate with poor survival of the flap. Survival in this group of HN cancer patients was 9.0 months (median, range 2.4-34.2) after a median follow-up of 11.9 months (range 1.0-61.0 months). Seven HN patients of this group are alive without any sign of recurrence and one patient has died of other causes. All of the 13 breast reconstruction patients included in the study are alive and free of disease at a median follow-up time of 27.4 months (range 13.9-35.7 months). Re-explorations were carried out in three patients due data provided by p_tiO₂ monitoring and one re-exploration was avoided on the basis of adequate blood perfusion assessed with PET. Two patients had donorsite morbidity and 3 patients had partial flap necrosis or fat necrosis. There were no total flap losses. Conclusions: P_tiO₂ monitoring is a feasible method of free flap monitoring when flap temperature is monitored and maintained close to the core temperature. When other monitoring methods give controversial results or are unavailable, [₁₅O] H₂O PET technique is feasible in the evaluation of the perfusion of the newly reconstructed free flaps.

Kangasniemi 17.1.1940

Kirje

Hina 17.8.1943

Kirje

Rouva Nina Tuomainen 17/11 1973

Kirje 17.11.1973

Tasavallan Presidentin virallinen vierailu Unkariin 17.11.-20.11.1976 (Tasavallan Presidentin vastauspuhe ensimmäinen sihteeri Janos Kadarin ja puhemiesneuvoston puheenjohtaja Pal Losonczin tarjoamilla juhlapäivällisillä Budapestissa 17.11.1976)

Puhe

Kansakoulunopettaja Lea Tamminen 17/12 1966

Kirje 17.12.1966