2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling ozone deposition fluxes: The relative roles of deposition and detoxification processes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
32
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
3
32
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…11) due to decreasing levels of irradiance. A similar pattern was observed by Emberson et al (2000) and Tuzet et al (2011) who concluded that reduction in g sto in the early evening was due to decreasing irradiance and air and soil humidity; yet, ideal conditions for conductance occurred in the morning. Also, Gerosa et al (2003) showed that afternoon high O 3 concentrations are thus less harmful than the same ones in the morning.…”
Section: Ambient Ozone Levelssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…11) due to decreasing levels of irradiance. A similar pattern was observed by Emberson et al (2000) and Tuzet et al (2011) who concluded that reduction in g sto in the early evening was due to decreasing irradiance and air and soil humidity; yet, ideal conditions for conductance occurred in the morning. Also, Gerosa et al (2003) showed that afternoon high O 3 concentrations are thus less harmful than the same ones in the morning.…”
Section: Ambient Ozone Levelssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Biochemical models, e.g. SODA (Simulated Ozone Detoxification in the Apoplast) and MODD (Model of Ozone Deposition and Detoxification) (Tuzet et al, 2011) could be used to quantify diurnal changes of the O 3 detoxification capacity. Linking the diurnal change of detoxification with the information of hourly O 3 concentrations and stomatal O 3 flux, effective O 3 flux can be defined as a more reliable and precise measure of O 3 impacts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whether it is possible to separate the components of R ns (R c2 -external surfaces; R c3 -soil; R c4 -in-canopy chemistry) depends on the nature of the measurement site and canopy, and there are some models available based on measurements over bare soil, senescent vegetation and in-canopy chemistry (Launiainen et al, 2013;Fares et al, 2013bFares et al, , 2012Büker et al, 2012;Tuzet et al, 2011;Stella et al, 2011). Many research groups have taken this approach, and Table 1 provides a summary of some of the different estimates of the values for R ns in the literature.…”
Section: B Non-stomatal Uptakementioning
confidence: 99%