Modelling <scp>C</scp><sub>3</sub> photosynthesis from the chloroplast to the ecosystem

Bernacchi, Carl J.; Bagley, Justin E.; Serbin, Shawn P.; Ruiz‐Vera, Ursula M.; Rosenthal, David; VanLoocke, Andy

doi:10.1111/pce.12118

Cited by 153 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 199 publications

(240 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The switch between the Rubisco-and RuBP regeneration-limited A is difficult to estimate and is a source of uncertainty in the estimation of the photosynthetic capacities of the leaf (Bernacchi et al, 2013). Therefore, the fluorescence data collected during the A/C i curves were used to calculate F q 9/F m 9, which reaches a plateau when A is RuBP regeneration limited (Long and Bernacchi, 2003).…”

Section: Estimating Photosynthetic Capacities and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acclimation of plants to light has been studied extensively, yet little is known about the effect of dynamic fluctuations in light on plant phenotype and acclimatory responses. We mimicked natural fluctuations in light over a diurnal period to examine the effect on the photosynthetic processes and growth of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). High and low light intensities, delivered via a realistic dynamic fluctuating or square wave pattern, were used to grow and assess plants. Plants subjected to square wave light had thicker leaves and greater photosynthetic capacity compared with fluctuating light-grown plants. This, together with elevated levels of proteins associated with electron transport, indicates greater investment in leaf structural components and photosynthetic processes. In contrast, plants grown under fluctuating light had thinner leaves, lower leaf light absorption, but maintained similar photosynthetic rates per unit leaf area to square wave-grown plants. Despite high light use efficiency, plants grown under fluctuating light had a slow growth rate early in development, likely due to the fact that plants grown under fluctuating conditions were not able to fully utilize the light energy absorbed for carbon fixation. Diurnal leaf-level measurements revealed a negative feedback control of photosynthesis, resulting in a decrease in total diurnal carbon assimilated of at least 20%. These findings highlight that growing plants under square wave growth conditions ultimately fails to predict plant performance under realistic light regimes and stress the importance of considering fluctuations in incident light in future experiments that aim to infer plant productivity under natural conditions in the field.In the natural environment, plants experience a range of light intensities and spectral properties due to changes in sun angle and cloud cover in addition to shading from overlapping leaves and neighboring plants. Therefore, leaves are subjected to spatial and temporal gradients in incident light, which has major consequences for photosynthetic carbon assimilation (Pearcy, 1990;Chazdon and Pearcy, 1991;Pearcy and Way, 2012). As light is the key resource for photosynthesis, plants acclimate to the light environment under which they are grown to maintain performance and fitness. Acclimation involves altering metabolic processes (including light harvesting and CO 2 capture) brought about by a range of mechanisms, from adjustments to leaf morphology to changes in photosynthetic apparatus stoichiometry (Terashima et al., 2006;Athanasiou et al., 2010;Kono and Terashima, 2014), all of which impact on photosynthesis. The primary determinant of crop yield is the cumulative rate of photosynthesis over the growing season, which is regulated by the amount of light captured by the plant and the ability of the plant to efficiently use this energy to convert CO 2 into biomass and harvestable yield (Sinclair and Muchow, 1999). Currently, considerable research efforts in plant biology focus on improving performance,...

show abstract

Section: Estimating Photosynthetic Capacities and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although PolarVPRM calibration and validation sites were paired on the basis of having similar physical and biological characteristics, important differences appear to exist in the drivers of NEE at these sites, which are not captured by PolarVPRM. In order to identify whether the calibration or validation LUE values are more representative across HL tundra sites, a larger network of HL EC towers and measurements of light-response curves using leaf-level observations of gas exchange (Bernacchi et al, 2013) would be required.…”

Section: Error Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Polar Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model: a parsimonious, satellite-data-driven model of high-latitude CO<sub>2</sub> exchange

Luus

Lin

2015

Geosci. Model Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We introduce the Polar Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model (PolarVPRM), a remote-sensingbased approach for generating accurate, high-resolution ( ≥ 1 km 2 , 3 hourly) estimates of net ecosystem CO 2 exchange (NEE). PolarVPRM simulates NEE using polarspecific vegetation classes, and by representing high-latitude influences on NEE, such as the influence of soil temperature on subnivean respiration. We present a description, validation and error analysis (first-order Taylor expansion) of PolarVPRM, followed by an examination of per-pixel trends (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012) in model output for the North American terrestrial region north of 55 • N. PolarVPRM was validated against eddy covariance (EC) observations from nine North American sites, of which three were used in model calibration. Comparisons of EC NEE to NEE from three models indicated that PolarVPRM displayed similar or better statistical agreement with eddy covariance observations than existing models showed. Trend analysis (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012) indicated that warming air temperatures and drought stress in forests increased growing season rates of respiration, and decreased rates of net carbon uptake by vegetation when air temperatures exceeded optimal temperatures for photosynthesis. Concurrent increases in growing season length at Arctic tundra sites allowed for increases in photosynthetic uptake over time by tundra vegetation. PolarVPRM estimated that the North American high-latitude region changed from a carbon source (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004) to a carbon sink (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010) to again a source (2011)(2012) in response to changing environmental conditions.

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4]. If acclimation is limited, leaf-level carbon assimilation of C 3 plants will increase as the CO 2 concentration increases, as shown by, among others, observations in Free-Air CO 2 Enrichment (FACE) experiments (5-7).…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

Partitioning direct and indirect effects reveals the response of water-limited ecosystems to elevated CO ₂

Fatichi

Leuzinger

Paschalis

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

114

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide are expected to affect carbon assimilation and evapotranspiration (ET), ultimately driving changes in plant growth, hydrology, and the global carbon balance. Direct leaf biochemical effects have been widely investigated, whereas indirect effects, although documented, elude explicit quantification in experiments. Here, we used a mechanistic model to investigate the relative contributions of direct (through carbon assimilation) and indirect (via soil moisture savings due to stomatal closure, and changes in leaf area index) effects of elevated CO 2 across a variety of ecosystems. We specifically determined which ecosystems and climatic conditions maximize the indirect effects of elevated CO 2 . The simulations suggest that the indirect effects of elevated CO 2 on net primary productivity are large and variable, ranging from less than 10% to more than 100% of the size of direct effects. For ET, indirect effects were, on average, 65% of the size of direct effects. Indirect effects tended to be considerably larger in water-limited ecosystems. As a consequence, the total CO 2 effect had a significant, inverse relationship with the wetness index and was directly related to vapor pressure deficit. These results have major implications for our understanding of the CO 2 response of ecosystems and for global projections of CO 2 fertilization, because, although direct effects are typically understood and easily reproducible in models, simulations of indirect effects are far more challenging and difficult to constrain. Our findings also provide an explanation for the discrepancies between experiments in the total CO 2 effect on net primary productivity.he leaf-level response to elevated CO 2 (eCO 2 ) is well known: at current CO 2 levels, photosynthesis of C 3 plants is not saturated, whereas, for C 4 plants, it is close to saturation (e.g., refs. 1-4). If acclimation is limited, leaf-level carbon assimilation of C 3 plants will increase as the CO 2 concentration increases, as shown by, among others, observations in Free-Air CO 2 Enrichment (FACE) experiments (5-7). Concurrently, stomatal conductance decreases consistently with eCO 2 in most species (8-11). Even though the leaf-level responses are well characterized and quantifiable, the ecosystem response to eCO 2 remains considerably more uncertain and difficult to predict (12-17). This discrepancy is not simply a consequence of the uncertainty in scaling up from leaf to canopy and ecosystem but derives from indirect effects and feedbacks that may lead to an amplification or dampening of the direct leaf-level response to eCO 2 .Indirect effects may be related to (i) modifications of plant water status through changes in soil moisture within the root zone, which occur as a consequence of stomatal closure; (ii) changes in Leaf Area Index (LAI), root biomass and depth, and canopy structure; (iii) limitations due to soil nutrient scarcity or plant incapability to take up nutrients at a rate sufficient to support enhanced c...

show abstract

Modelling C₃ photosynthesis from the chloroplast to the ecosystem

Cited by 153 publications

References 199 publications

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

The Polar Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model: a parsimonious, satellite-data-driven model of high-latitude CO<sub>2</sub> exchange

Partitioning direct and indirect effects reveals the response of water-limited ecosystems to elevated CO ₂

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Modelling C3 photosynthesis from the chloroplast to the ecosystem

Cited by 153 publications

References 199 publications

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation

The Polar Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model: a parsimonious, satellite-data-driven model of high-latitude CO&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt; exchange

Partitioning direct and indirect effects reveals the response of water-limited ecosystems to elevated CO 2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Modelling C₃ photosynthesis from the chloroplast to the ecosystem

The Polar Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model: a parsimonious, satellite-data-driven model of high-latitude CO<sub>2</sub> exchange

Partitioning direct and indirect effects reveals the response of water-limited ecosystems to elevated CO ₂