Forests and ozone: Productivity, carbon storage, and feedbacks

Scientific Reports

Volumn 6, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Wang, Bin ^a   Shugart, Herman H ^a   Shuman, Jacquelyn K ^a   Lerdau, Manuel T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

1,3 BUTADIENE DERIVATIVE; CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE; HEMITERPENE; ISOPRENE; OZONE; PENTANE;

AIR POLLUTION; ANALYSIS; ATMOSPHERE; BIOMASS; CLASSIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FOREST; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGICAL FEEDBACK; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; THEORETICAL MODEL; TREE;

AIR POLLUTION; ATMOSPHERE; BIOMASS; BUTADIENES; CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEEDBACK, PHYSIOLOGICAL; FORESTS; HEMITERPENES; MODELS, THEORETICAL; OZONE; PENTANES; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TREES;

EID: 84959419882     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep22133     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Sitch, S., Cox, P., Collins, W. & Huntingford, C. Indirect radiative forcing of climate change through ozone effects on the land-carbon sink. Nature 448, 791-794 (2007).
2. Felzer, B. et al. Future effects of ozone on carbon sequestration and climate change policy using a global biogeochemical model. Clim. Change 73, 345-373 (2005).
3. Lombardozzi, D., Levis, S., Bonan, G., Hess, P. G. & Sparks, J. P. The influence of chronic ozone exposure on global carbon and water cycles. J. Clim. 28, 292-305 (2015).
4. Wittig, V. E., Ainsworth, E. A. & Long, S. P. To what extent do current and projected increases in surface ozone affect photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of trees? A meta-analytic review of the last 3 decades of experiments. Plant Cell Environ. 30, 1150-1162 (2007).
5. Ainsworth, E. A., Yendrek, C. R., Sitch, S., Collins, W. J. & Emberson, L. D. The effects of tropospheric ozone on net primary productivity and implications for climate change. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 63, 637-661 (2012).
6. 3 influences on terrestrial processes: photosynthetic and stomatal response data available for regional and global modeling. Biogeosciences 10, 6815-6831 (2013).
7. Reich, P. B. Quantifying plant response to ozone: a unifying theory. Tree Physiol. 3, 63-91 (1987).
8. Wittig, V. E., Ainsworth, E. A., Naidu, S. L., Karnosky, D. F. & Long, S. P. Quantifying the impact of current and future tropospheric ozone on tree biomass, growth, physiology and biochemistry: a quantitative meta-analysis. Glob. Change Biol. 15, 396-424 (2009).
9. Matyssek, R. et al. Advances in understanding ozone impact on forest trees: messages from novel phytotron and free-air fumigation studies. Environ. Pollut. 158, 1990-2006 (2010).
10. 3 on intra- and interspecific competitive ability of aspen. Plant Biol. 9, 342-355 (2007).
11. 3. Glob. Change Biol. 13, 2230-2238 (2007).
12. Matyssek, R. et al. Enhanced ozone strongly reduces carbon sink strength of adult beech (Fagus sylvatica) - Resume from the free-air fumigation study at Kranzberg Forest. Environ. Pollut. 158, 2527-2532 (2010).
13. 2. Ecol. Lett. 14, 1220-1226 (2011).
14. Talhelm, A. F. et al. Elevated carbon dioxide and ozone alter productivity and ecosystem carbon content in northern temperate forests. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 2492-2504 (2014).
15. Shugart, H. H. A Theory of Forest Dynamics: The Ecological Implications of Forest Succession Models. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984).
16. Grimm, V. et al. Pattern-oriented modeling of agent-based complex systems: lessons from ecology. Science 310, 987-991 (2005).
17. Shugart, H. H. & Woodward, F. I. Global Change and the Terrestrial Biosphere: Achievements and Challenges. (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2011).
18. Shuman, J. K., Shugart, H. H. & Krankina, O. N. Testing individual-based models of forest dynamics: Issues and an example from the boreal forests of Russia. Ecol. Model. 293, 102-110 (2013).
19. McLaughlin, S. B., Nosal, M., Wullschleger, S. D. & Sun, G. Interactive effects of ozone and climate on tree growth and water use in a southern Appalachian forest in the USA New Phytol. 174, 109-124 (2007).
20. Guenther, A. B. et al. Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature). Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6, 3181-3210 (2006).
21. Guenther, A. B. et al. The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions. Geosci. Model Dev. 5, 1471-1492 (2012).
22. Sharkey, T. D. & Monson, R. K. The future of isoprene emission from leaves, canopies and landscapes. Plant Cell Environ. 37, 1727-1740 (2014).
23. Lerdau, M. A positive feedback with negative consequences. Science 316, 212-213 (2007).
24. Sharkey, T. D. Why plants emit isoprene. Nature 374, 769 (1995).
25. Vickers, C. E., Gershenzon, J., Lerdau, M. T. & Loreto, F. A unified mechanism of action for volatile isoprenoids in plant abiotic stress. Nat. Chem. Biol. 5, 283-291 (2009).
26. Loreto, F. & Velikova, V. Isoprene produced by leaves protects the photosynthetic apparatus against ozone damage, quenches ozone products, and reduces lipid peroxidation of cellular membranes. Plant Physiol. 127, 1781-1787 (2001).
27. Fowler, D. et al. Effects of land use on surface-atmosphere exchanges of trace gases and energy in Borneo: comparing fluxes over oil palm plantations and a rainforest. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 366, 3196-3209 (2011).
28. Mooney, H. A., Vitousek, P. M. & Matson, P. A. Exchange of materials between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere. Science 238, 926-932 (1987).
29. 2 levels. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 21, 167-196 (1990).
30. Lerdau, M. & Slobodkin, L. Trace gas emissions and species-dependent ecosystem services. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 309-312 (2002).
31. Rudd, M. A. et al. Generation of priority research questions to inform conservation policy and management at a national level. Conserv. Biol. 25, 476-484 (2011).
32. Hickman, J. E., Wu, S., Mickley, L. J. & Lerdau, M. T. Kudzu (Pueraria montana) invasion doubles emissions of nitric oxide and increases ozone pollution. Proc. Natl. Acad. of Sci. USA 107, 10115-10119 (2010).
33. Yan, X. & Shugart, H. FAREAST: a forest gap model to simulate dynamics and patterns of eastern Eurasian forests. J. of Biogeogr. 32, 1641-1658 (2005).
34. Geron, C., Harley, P. & Guenther, A. Isoprene emission capacity for US tree species. Atmos. Environ. 35, 3341-3352 (2001).
35. Guenther, A. et al. A global model of natural volatile organic compound emissions. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 8873-8892 (1995).
36. Goudriaan, J. & Van Laar, H. H. Modelling Potential Crop Growth Processes: Textbook With Exercises. (Springer, Netherlands, 1994).
37. Zanne, A. E. et al. Data from: Towards a Worldwide Wood Econimics Spectrum. (Dryad Data Repository, 2009).
38. Weinstein, D. A. The Long-term Nutrient Retention Properties of Forest Ecosystems: A Simulation Investigation. (University of Tennessee, 1982).
39. Fowells, H. A. Silvics of Forest Trees of the United States. Agricutural. Handbook. (US Dep. Agric., 1965).
40. Hardin, J. W., Leopold, D. J. & White, F. M. Harlow & Harrar's Textbook of Dendrology. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001).
41. Van Miegroet, H., Norby, R. J. & Tschaplinski, T. J. Nitrogen fertilization strategies in a short-rotation sycamore plantation. Forest Ecol. and Manag. 64, 13-24 (1994).
42. 2-enrichment. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 1684-1697 (2012).
43. 3) on vegetation. Environ. Pollut. 61, 263-393 (1989).
44. Coulston, J., Smith, G. & Smith, W. Regional assessment of ozone sensitive tree species using bioindicator plants. Environ. Monit. Assess. 83, 113-127 (2003).
45. Davis, D. D. & Skelly, J. M. Growth response of four species of eastern hardwood tree seedlings exposed to ozone, acidic precipitation, and sulfur dioxide. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 42, 309-311 (1992).
46. Tjoelker, M. G., Volin, J. C., Oleksyn, J. & Reich, P. B. Light environment alters response to ozone stress in seedlings of Acer saccharum Marsh. and hybrid Populus L. I. in situ net photosynthesis, dark respiration and growth. New Phytol. 124, 627-636 (1993).
47. Samuelson, L. J. Ozone-exposure responses of black cherry and red maple seedlings. Environ. Exp. Bot. 34, 355-362 (1994).
48. Laurence, J. A., Kohut, R. J., Amundson, R. G., Weinstein, D. A. & MacLean, D. C. Response of sugar maple to multiple year exposures to ozone and simulated acidic precipitation. Environ. Pollut. 92, 119-126 (1996).
49. Chappelka, A., Renfro, J., Somers, G. & Nash, B. Evaluation of ozone injury on foliage of black cherry (Prunus serotina) and tall milkweed (Asclepias exaltata) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ. Pollut. 95, 13-18 (1997).
50. Weinstein, D. A., Gollands, B. & Retzlaff, W. A. The effects of ozone on a lower slope forest of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park: simulations linking an individual tree model to a stand model. Forest Sci. 47, 29-42 (2001).
51. Schaub, M. et al. Physiological and foliar injury responses of Prunus serotina, Fraxinus americana, and Acer rubrum seedlings to varying soil moisture and ozone. Environ. Pollut. 124, 307-320 (2003).
52. Bugmann, H., Fischlin, A. & Kienast, F. Model convergence and state variable update in forest gap models. Ecol. Model. 89, 197-208 (1996).