Interannual variability in ozone removal by a temperate deciduous forest

Clifton, Olivia; Fiore, Arlene M.; Munger, J. William; Malyshev, Sergey; Horowitz, Larry W.; Shevliakova, Elena; Paulot, Fabien; Murray, Lee T.; Griffin, Kevin L.

doi:10.1002/2016gl070923

Cited by 62 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the most part, we use the L15 and W15 g s estimates to support our findings with P‐M g s . Clifton et al () find similar interannual variability in g s estimates from L15 and P‐M, so we are fairly confident that P‐M represents g s variations on this timescale. We are less confident in the ability of P‐M g s to represent subseasonal variability in g s due to changes in evaporation with rain and aridity.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

Spatiotemporal Controls on Observed Daytime Ozone Deposition Velocity Over Northeastern U.S. Forests During Summer

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatiotemporal variability in ozone dry deposition is often overlooked despite its implications for interpreting and modeling tropospheric ozone concentrations accurately. Understanding the influences of stomatal versus nonstomatal deposition processes on ozone deposition velocity is important for attributing observed changes in the ozone depositional sink and associated damage to ecosystems. Here, we aim to identify the stomatal versus nonstomatal deposition processes driving observed variability in ozone deposition velocity over the northeastern United States during June–September. We use ozone eddy covariance measurements from Harvard Forest in Massachusetts, which span a decade, and from Kane Experimental Forest in Pennsylvania and Sand Flats State Forest in New York, which span one growing season each, along with observation‐driven modeling. Using a cumulative precipitation indicator of soil wetness, we infer that high soil uptake during dry years and low soil uptake during wet years may contribute to the twofold interannual variability in ozone deposition velocity at Harvard Forest. We link stomatal deposition and humidity to variability in ozone deposition velocity on daily timescales. The humidity dependence may reflect higher uptake by leaf cuticles under humid conditions, noted in previous work. Previous work also suggests that uptake by leaf cuticles may be enhanced after rain, but we find that increases in ozone deposition velocity on rainy days are instead mostly associated with increases in stomatal conductance. Our analysis highlights a need for constraints on subseasonal variability in ozone dry deposition to soil and fast in‐canopy chemistry during ecosystem stress.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

Spatiotemporal Controls on Observed Daytime Ozone Deposition Velocity Over Northeastern U.S. Forests During Summer

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Non-stomatal dry deposition is increasingly been recognized to be crucial for removal of O 3 from the atmosphere (Altimir et al, 2006;Fares et al, 2010;Clifton et al, 2017). There exist, however, multiple pathways of non-stomatal deposition Fowler et al, 2009) and this knowledge is required for inclusion in current model parameterizations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variability of Ozone Deposition Velocity Over a Mixed Suburban Temperate Forest

Neirynck¹,

Verstraeten²

2018

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 10-year long dataset of half-hourly ozone (O 3 ) fluxes was used to study the variability in deposition velocity (υ d ) over a mixed temperate suburban forest. Average (median) υ d amounted to 0.70 (0.46) cm s −1 , with day-and night-time average (median) of 0.98 (0.73) cm s −1 and 0.46 (0.30) cm s −1 , respectively. It was found that the precipitation form had a marked impact on υ d and the deposition efficiency (υ d/ υ dmax ), with highest values measured when the canopy was dew-wetted or covered with snow. The analysis further evidenced that traffic volume led to increased deposition due to the presence of chemical reactions between O 3 and nitric oxide (NO) above the canopy surface. During the working week, daytime values of υ d, υ d/ υ dmax and the O 3 fluxes (F) were found to be significantly higher than the weekend values, especially during the winter half-year. In a next step, half hourly deposition data were aggregated into day-and night-time monthly values, for a correlative study with measured environmental variables. Monthly average night-time/daytime υ d and υ d/ υ dmax were positively correlated with the relative humidity at the canopy surface (RH(z 0 ′ )) and negatively correlated with the water levels below the ground surface. During the daytime, monthly υ d and υ d/ υ dmax were additionally increased during the working-week when traffic volume was high. There existed, however, substantially different weather conditions, in which unaccounted covariates with a totally different meteorological signature controlled the υ d and F. It was speculated that, among other, biogenic volatile compounds (BVOCs) could have contributed to O 3 quenching in some (spring) months with severe drought stress.

show abstract

“…This partly reflects the range of different processes involved, from adsorption and chemical take-up in plant stomata (Fowler et al, 2009) to iodine-mediated removal at the ocean surface (PradosRoman et al, 2015). Analysis of observational studies of the processes controlling ozone deposition shows that the importance of different deposition pathways differs by location as well as by season and from year to year at each location (Rannik et al, 2012;Clifton et al, 2017). Comparison of dry deposition fluxes from 15 global models involved in the TF HTAP model intercomparison project (Table 1) found that differences in ozone dry deposition are strongly influenced by differences in land cover classification used in models (Hardacre et al, 2015).…”

Section: Wet and Dry Depositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Assessment of global-scale model performance for global and regional ozone distributions, variability, and trends

Young

Naik

Fiore

et al. 2018

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

Self Cite

256

274

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of the Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report (TOAR) is to provide the research community with an up-to-date scientific assessment of tropospheric ozone, from the surface to the tropopause. While a suite of observations provides significant information on the spatial and temporal distribution of tropospheric ozone, observational gaps make it necessary to use global atmospheric chemistry models to synthesize our understanding of the processes and variables that control tropospheric ozone abundance and its variability. Models facilitate the interpretation of the observations and allow us to make projections of future tropospheric ozone and trace gas distributions for different anthropogenic or natural perturbations. This paper assesses the skill of current-generation global atmospheric chemistry models in simulating the observed present-day tropospheric ozone distribution, variability, and trends. Drawing upon the results of recent international multi-model intercomparisons and using a range of model evaluation techniques, we demonstrate that global chemistry models are broadly skillful in capturing the spatio-temporal variations of tropospheric ozone over the seasonal cycle, for extreme pollution episodes, and changes over interannual to decadal periods. However, models are consistently biased high in the northern hemisphere and biased low in the southern hemisphere, throughout the depth of the troposphere, and are unable to replicate particular metrics that define the longer term trends in tropospheric ozone as derived from some background sites. When the models compare unfavorably against observations, we discuss the potential causes of model biases and propose directions for future developments, including improved evaluations that may be able to better diagnose the root cause of the model-observation disparity. Overall, model results should be approached critically, including determining whether the model performance is acceptable for the problem being addressed, whether biases can be tolerated or corrected, whether the model is appropriately constituted, and whether there is a way to satisfactorily quantify the uncertainty.

show abstract

Interannual variability in ozone removal by a temperate deciduous forest

Cited by 62 publications

References 119 publications

Spatiotemporal Controls on Observed Daytime Ozone Deposition Velocity Over Northeastern U.S. Forests During Summer

Spatiotemporal Controls on Observed Daytime Ozone Deposition Velocity Over Northeastern U.S. Forests During Summer

Variability of Ozone Deposition Velocity Over a Mixed Suburban Temperate Forest

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Assessment of global-scale model performance for global and regional ozone distributions, variability, and trends

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About