The curve, not the switch
Plot the rate of photosynthesis against light intensity and you get a curve with a clear shape: a straight rise from the origin, a gentle bend, then a flat plateau. That shape is not an accident — it is two different chemical processes taking turns as the bottleneck. In the dark, a leaf is a net carbon source: mitochondrial respiration burns sugar and releases CO2 while the light reactions are switched off. As light rises, the photosystems begin splitting water and pumping electrons, gross photosynthesis climbs, and at some point it exactly cancels respiration.
That crossing point is the light compensation point. Below it a plant loses carbon; above it, it gains. Shade-tolerant species evolve a low compensation point by keeping respiration cheap, which is exactly why an understory fern can survive on light a sun-loving crop would starve on.
The non-rectangular hyperbola
Physiologists fit the curve with a non-rectangular hyperbola rather than a straight line plus a plateau, because the transition between the light-limited and light-saturated regimes is gradual, not a sharp corner:
θ·P² − (α·I + Pmax)·P + α·I·Pmax = 0 I = incident light (PAR, μmol photons m⁻² s⁻¹) α = initial slope = quantum yield (mol CO2 per mol photon) Pmax = light-saturated rate θ = curvature (0 = straight corner, 1 = smooth hyperbola) P = net photosynthetic rate, solved from the quadratic above
The initial slope α is set almost entirely by the quantum efficiency of the light-harvesting complexes and is remarkably constant across species — around 0.05 mol CO2 per mol photon for C3 plants. The plateau height Pmax, by contrast, varies enormously with species, nitrogen status and temperature, because it is set downstream, by how fast the Calvin cycle can actually process the ATP and NADPH the light reactions hand it.
Blackman's law of limiting factors
In 1905 Frederick Blackman proposed that when a process depends on several factors, its rate is set by whichever factor is in shortest supply — not by their average or their sum. On the light-response curve this is why the plateau is flat: past saturation, adding more light does nothing because light was never the constraint anymore. The real bottleneck has shifted to the carboxylation capacity of the enzyme Rubisco, or to the CO2 diffusing in through the stomata.
This is precisely why greenhouse growers raise CO2 concentration and light together rather than either alone: doubling light under ambient, Rubisco-limited CO2 barely moves the plateau, but doubling CO2 while keeping light bright raises Pmax substantially — until Rubisco itself, or nitrogen supply to make more of it, becomes the new limit.
C3 versus C4: two different plateaus
C3 plants (wheat, rice, most trees) fix CO2 directly with Rubisco, an enzyme that also reacts with oxygen in a wasteful side reaction called photorespiration. At high temperature and high light, oxygenation increases relative to carboxylation and the plateau actually sags. C4 plants (maize, sugarcane, sorghum) evolved a CO2-concentrating pump — a preliminary fixation step in mesophyll cells that shuttles a four-carbon acid into bundle-sheath cells, where CO2 is released at high local concentration around Rubisco. That pump suppresses photorespiration almost entirely, so C4 plants reach a higher plateau and keep climbing at light intensities where C3 plants have already saturated, at the metabolic cost of extra ATP per CO2 fixed.
Temperature and the moving plateau
Pmax is not fixed — it shifts with temperature because Rubisco kinetics and photorespiration are both temperature-dependent. In C3 plants the optimum is often 20-30°C; above it, photorespiration eats further into the net rate even as the raw enzyme kinetics speed up, so the plateau can fall even as leaf temperature rises. This is one reason the same crop grown at different times of year, or under different irrigation regimes that change leaf cooling by transpiration, can show quite different saturation heights on the same light axis.
Frequently asked questions
Why does adding more light eventually stop helping?
Because past the saturation point something other than light is limiting the rate — usually the speed of the Calvin cycle enzyme Rubisco, or the CO2 supply to the leaf. Blackman's law of limiting factors says the rate is set by whichever factor is scarcest, so pouring on more of an already-abundant factor (light) does nothing until the bottleneck factor is raised too.
What is the compensation point?
The light intensity at which gross photosynthesis exactly equals respiration, so net CO2 exchange is zero. Below it a plant is a net carbon source; above it, a net sink. Shade-adapted plants have a much lower compensation point than sun-adapted ones because their respiration rate is lower.
Does raising CO2 always increase the photosynthesis rate?
Only up to a point, and only if light and temperature are not already the binding constraint. In dim light, Rubisco is starved of the energy (ATP and NADPH) that the light reactions supply, so extra CO2 has nothing to react with. Raise CO2 and light together and the whole curve shifts upward.
Try it live
Everything above runs in your browser — open Photosynthesis Light Response and change the parameters while it is running. Nothing is installed, nothing is uploaded, the whole model lives in one tab.
▶ Open Photosynthesis Light Response simulation