On the complementary relationship between marginal nitrogen and water-use efficiencies among Pinus taeda leaves grown under ambient and CO 2-enriched environments

Annals of Botany

Volumn 111, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 467-477

  Palmroth, Sari ^a,b   Katul, Gabriel G ^a,c   Maier, Chris A ^d   Ward, Eric ^a   Manzoni, Stefano ^a,c   Vico, Giulia ^b,c  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^c Duke University   (United States)

^d USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Elevated CO2; FACE; fertilization; leaf gas exchange; nitrogen; optimal stomatal conductance; pine; Pinus taeda; water use efficiency

Indexed keywords

AMMONIUM NITRATE; CARBON DIOXIDE; FERTILIZER; NITRATE; NITROGEN; WATER;

BIOMASS; CARBON DIOXIDE; CONIFEROUS TREE; GAS EXCHANGE; LEAF; NITROGEN; NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY; PHOTOSYNTHESIS; STOMATAL CONDUCTANCE; WATER USE EFFICIENCY;

ACCLIMATIZATION; ARTICLE; ATMOSPHERE; CHEMISTRY; DIFFUSION; ECOSYSTEM; EVAPOTRANSPIRATION; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; LOBLOLLY PINE; METABOLISM; PHOTOSYNTHESIS; PLANT LEAF; PLANT STOMA; SOIL;

ACCLIMATIZATION; ATMOSPHERE; CARBON DIOXIDE; DIFFUSION; ECOSYSTEM; FERTILIZERS; NITRATES; NITROGEN; PHOTOSYNTHESIS; PINUS TAEDA; PLANT LEAVES; PLANT STOMATA; PLANT TRANSPIRATION; SOIL; WATER;

NORTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84874503395     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: 10958290     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcs268     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ainsworth EA, Rogers A. 2007. The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: mechanisms and environmental interactions. Plant, Cell & Environment 30: 258-270.
2. Anten NPR, Schieving F, Werger MJA. 1995. Patterns of light and nitrogen distribution in relation to whole canopy carbon gain in C-3 and C-4 monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous species. Oecologia 101: 504-513.
3. Barton CVM, Duursma RA, Medlyn BE, et al. 2012. Effects of elevated atmospheric [CO2] on instantaneous transpiration efficiency at leaf and canopy scales in Eucalyptus saligna. Global Change Biology 18: 585-595.
4. Bloom AJ, Sukrapanna SS, Warner RL. 1992. Root respiration associated with ammonium and nitrate absorption and assimilation by barley. Plant Physiology 99: 1294-1301.
5. Bonan GB. 2008. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science 320: 1444-1449.
6. Buckley TN. 2008. The role of stomatal acclimation in modelling tree adaptation to high CO2. Journal of Experimental Botany 59: 1951-1961.
7. Buckley TN, Miller JM, Farquhar GD. 2002. The mathematics of linked optimisation for water and nitrogen use in a canopy. Silva Fennica 36: 639-669.
8. Campbell GS, Norman JM. 1998. An introduction to environmental biophysics, 2nd edn. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
9. Cernusak LA,Winter K, Aranda J, Turner BL. 2008. Conifers, angiosperm trees, and lianas: growth, whole-plant water and nitrogen use efficiency, and stable isotope composition (delta C-13 and delta O-18) of seedlings grown in a tropical environment. Plant Physiology 148: 642-659.
10. Cheng LL, Fuchigami LH. 2000. Rubisco activation state decreases with increasing nitrogen content in apple leaves. Journal of Experimental Botany 51: 1687-1694.
11. Cowan I, Farquhar GD. 1977. Stomatal function in relation to leaf metabolism and environment. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology 31: 471-505.
12. Crous KY, Ellsworth DS. 2004. Canopy position affects photosynthetic adjustments to long-term elevated CO2 concentration (FACE) in aging needles in a mature Pinus taeda forest. Tree Physiology 24: 961-970.
13. Crous KY, Walters MB, Ellsworth DS. 2008. Elevated CO2 concentration affects leaf photosynthesis-nitrogen relationships in Pinus taeda over nine years in FACE. Tree Physiology 28: 607-614.
14. DeLucia EH, Schlesinger WH. 1991. Resource-use efficiency and drought tolerance in adjacent Great-Basin and Sierran plants. Ecology 72: 51-58.
15. Dewar RC, Franklin O, Makela A, McMurtrie RE, Valentine HT. 2009. Optimal function explains forest responses to global change. Bioscience 59: 127-139.
16. Dewar RC, Tarvainen L, Parker K, Wallin G, McMurtrie RE. 2012. Why does leaf nitrogen decline within tree canopies less rapidly than light? An explanation from optimization subject to a lower bound on leaf mass per area. Tree Physiology 32: 520-534.
17. Drake JE, Raetz LM, Davis SC, DeLucia EH. 2010. Hydraulic limitation not declining nitrogen availability causes the age-related photosynthetic decline in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) Plant, Cell & Environment 33: 1756-1766.
18. Ellsworth DS, Reich PB, Naumburg ES, Koch GW, Kubiske ME, Smith SD. 2004. Photosynthesis, carboxylation and leaf nitrogen responses of 16 species to elevated pCO2 across four free-air CO2 enrichment experiments in forest, grassland and desert. Global Change Biology 10: 2121-2138.
19. Ellsworth DS, Thomas R, Crous KY, et al. 2012. Elevated CO2 effects on photosynthetic responses to light and [CO2] over ten years: a synthesis from Duke FACE. Global Change Biology 18: 223-242.
20. Ethier GJ, Livingston NJ, Harrison DL, Black TA, Moran JA. 2006. Low stomatal and internal conductance to CO2 versus Rubisco deactivation as determinants of the photosynthetic decline of ageing evergreen leaves. Plant, Cell & Environment 29: 2168-2184.
21. Evans Jr. 1989. Photosynthesis and nitrogen relationships in leaves of C-3 plants. Oecologia 78: 9-19.
22. Farquhar GD, von Caemmerer S, Berry JA. 1980. A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149: 78-90.
23. Farquhar GD, Buckley TN, Miller JM. 2002. Optimal stomatal control in relation to leaf area and nitrogen content. Silva Fennica 36: 625-637.
24. Field C. 1983. Allocating leaf nitrogen for the maximization of carbon gain: leaf age as a control on the allocation program. Oecologia 56: 341-347.
25. Field C, Mooney HA. 1986. The photosynthesis-nitrogen relationship in wild plants. In: Givnish TJ. ed. On the economy of plant form and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 25-55.
26. Field C, Merino J, Mooney HA. 1983. Compromises between water-use efficiency and nitrogen-use efficiency in 5 species of California evergreens. Oecologia 60: 384-389.
27. Flexas J, Ribas-Carbo M, Diaz-Espejo A, Galmes J, Medrano H. 2008. Mesophyll conductance to CO2: current knowledge and future prospects. Plant, Cell & Environment 31: 602-621.
28. Han Q. 2011. Height-related decreases in mesophyll conductance, leaf photosynthesis and compensating adjustments associated with leaf nitrogen concentrations in Pinus densiflora. Tree Physiology 31: 976-984.
29. Hari P, Mäkelä A, Korpilahti E, Holmberg M. 1986. Optimal control of gas exchange. Tree Physiology 2. 169-176.
30. Katul GG, Palmroth S, Oren R. 2009. Leaf stomatal responses to vapour pressure deficit under current and CO2-enriched atmosphere explained by the economics of gas exchange. Plant, Cell & Environment 32: 968-979.
31. Katul GG, Manzoni S, Palmroth S, Oren R. 2010. A stomatal optimization theory to describe the effects of atmospheric CO2 on leaf photosynthesis and transpiration. Annals of Botany 105: 431-442.
32. Kull O, Kruijt B. 1999. Acclimation of photosynthesis to light: a mechanistic approach. Functional Ecology 13: 24-36.
33. Launiainen S, Katul GG, Kolari P, Vesala T, Hari P. 2011. Empirical and optimal stomatal controls on leaf and ecosystem level CO2 and H2O exchange rates. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 151: 1672-1689.
34. Lloyd J. 1991. Modeling stomatal responses to environment in Macadamia integrifolia. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 18: 649-660.
35. McMurtrie RE, Norby RJ, Medlyn BE, et al. 2008. Why is plant-growth response to elevated CO2 amplified when water is limiting, but reduced when nitrogen is limiting? A growth-optimisation hypothesis. Functional Plant Biology 35: 521-534.
36. McMurtrie R, Wolf L. 1983. Above-ground and below-ground growth of forest stands: a carbon budget model. Annals of Botany 52: 437-448.
37. Maier CA, Palmroth S, Ward E. 2008. Short-term effects of fertilization on photosynthesis and leaf morphology of field-grown loblolly pine following long-term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration. Tree Physiology 28: 557-606.
38. Manzoni S, Katul G, Fay PA, Polley HW, Porporato A. 2011a. Modeling the vegetation-atmosphere carbon dioxide and water vapor interactions along a controlled CO2 gradient. Ecological Modelling 222: 653-665.
39. Manzoni S, Vico G, Katul GG, et al. 2011b. Optimizing stomatal conductance for maximum carbon gain under water stress: a meta-analysis across plant functional types and climates, Functional Ecology, 25: 456-467.
40. Medlyn BE, Barton CVM, Broadmeadow MSJ, et al. 2001. Stomatal conductance of forest species after long-term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration: a synthesis. New Phytologist 149: 247-264.
41. Medlyn BE, Duursma RA, Eamus D, et al. 2011. Reconciling the optimal and empirical approaches to modelling stomatal conductance. Global Change Biology 17: 2134-2144.
42. Niinemets U, Tenhunen JD. 1997. A model separating leaf structural and physiological effects on carbon gain along light gradients for the shadetolerant species Acer saccharum. Plant, Cell & Environment 20: 845-866.
43. Ollinger SV, Richardson AD, Martin ME, et al. 2008. Canopy nitrogen, carbon assimilation, and albedo in temperate and boreal forests: functional relations and potential climate feedbacks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciciences of the USA 105: 19336-19341.
44. Palmroth S, Berninger F, Nikinmaa E, Lloyd J, Pulkkinen P, Hari. 1999. Structural adaptation rather than water conservation was observed in Scots pine over a range of wet to dry climates. Oecologia 121: 302-309.
45. Peltoniemi MS, Duursma RA, Medlyn BE. 2012. Co-optimal distribution of leaf nitrogen and hydraulic conductance in plant canopies. Tree Physiology, 32: 510-519.
46. Ramsey F, Schafer D. 1997. The statistical sleuth: a course in methods of data analysis. San Francisco, CA: Duxbury Press.
47. Rogers A, Ellsworth DS. 2002. Photosynthetic acclimation of Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) to long-term growth in elevated pCO2 (FACE). Plant, Cell & Environment 25: 851-858.
48. Volpe V, Manzoni S, Marani M, Katul GG. 2011. Leaf conductance and carbon gain under salt-stressed conditions, Journal of Geophysical Researach 116: G04035. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2011JG001848.
49. Warren CR, Dreyer E, Adams MA. 2003. Photosynthesis-Rubisco relationships in foliage of Pinus sylvestris in response to nitrogen supply and the proposed role of Rubisco and amino acids as nitrogen stores. Trees - Structure and Function 17: 359-366.
50. Way DA, Oren R, Kim HS, Katul GG. 2011. How well do stomatal conductance models perform on closing plant carbon budgets? A test using seedlings grown under current and elevated air temperatures. Journal of Geophysical Research-Biogeosciences 116: pG04031. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1029/2011JG001808.
51. Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M. 2003. Least-cost input mixtures of water and nitrogen for photosynthesis. American Naturalist 161: 98-111.
52. Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, et al 2004. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428: 821-827.