Home LiteratureArticle Details
PMID: 33874628 Published · ppublish English Journal Article

Stomatal conductance of forest species after long-term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration: a synthesis.

The New phytologist ·Vol. 149 ·No. 2 ·2001-02-00 ·Pages 247-264

Medlyn BE, Barton CVM, Broadmeadow MSJ, Ceulemans R, De Angelis P, Forstreuter M, Freeman M, Jackson SB, Kellomäki S, Laitat E, Rey A, Roberntz P, Sigurdsson BD, Strassemeyer J, Wang K, Curtis PS, Jarvis PG

Abstract

•  Data from 13 long-term (> 1 yr), field-based studies of the effects of elevated CO2 concentration ([CO2 ]) on European forest tree species were analysed using meta-analysis and modelling. Meta-analysis was used to determine mean responses across the data sets, and data were fitted to two commonly used models of stomatal conductance in order to explore response to environmental conditions and the relationship with assimilation. •  Meta-analysis indicated a significant decrease (21%) in stomatal conductance in response to growth in elevated [CO2 ] across all studies. The response to [CO2 ] was significantly stronger in young trees than old trees, in deciduous compared to coniferous trees, and in water stressed compared to nutrient stressed trees. No evidence of acclimation of stomatal conductance to elevated [CO2 ] was found. •  Fits of data to the first model showed that growth in elevated [CO2 ] did not alter the response of stomatal conductance to vapour pressure deficit, soil water content or atmospheric [CO2 ]. Fits of data to the second model indicated that conductance and assimilation responded in parallel to elevated [CO2 ] except when water was limiting. •  Data were compared to a previous meta-analysis and it was found that the response of gs to elevated [CO2 ] was much more consistent in long-term (> 1 yr) studies, emphasising the need for long-term elevated [CO2 ] studies. By interpreting data in terms of models, the synthesis will aid future modelling studies of responses of forest trees to elevated [CO2 ].

Keywords
acclimation elevated [CO2] forests meta-analysis model parameters stomatal conductance
Authors & Affiliations
17 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Medlyn B E
IERM, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, UK. | present address: School of Biological Science, University of New South Wales, UNSW Sydney 2052, Australia.
Barton C V M
IERM, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, UK.
Broadmeadow M S J
Forestry Commission, Alice Holt Lodge, Farnham, Surrey, UK.
Ceulemans R
Department of Biology, University of Antwerpen, Wilrijk, Belgium.
De Angelis P
DISAFRI, University of Tuscia, Viterbo, Italy.
Forstreuter M
Institut für Ökologie, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany.
Freeman M
Department of Economics and Natural Resources, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Denmark.
Jackson S B
Forestry Commission, Alice Holt Lodge, Farnham, Surrey, UK.
Kellomäki S
Faculty of Forestry, University of Joensuu, Finland.
Laitat E
Department de Biologie Vegétalé, Faculte des Sciences Agronomiques de Gembloux, Belgium.
Rey A
IERM, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, UK.
Roberntz P
Department for Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Sigurdsson B D
Department for Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden. | Agricultural Research Institute, Keldnaholt, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Strassemeyer J
Institut für Ökologie, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany.
Wang K
Faculty of Forestry, University of Joensuu, Finland.
Curtis P S
Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Jarvis P G
IERM, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, UK.
References (66)
66 references, click to expand
  1. Assmann SM. 1999. The cellular basis of guard cell sensing of rising CO2. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 629-637.
  2. Ball JT, Woodrow IE & Berry JA. 1987. A model predicting stomatal conductance and its contribution to the control of photosynthesis under different environmental conditions. In: Biggins J, ed. Progress in photosynthesis research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus-Nijhoff Publishers, 221-224.
  3. Barton CVM & Jarvis PG. 1999. Growth response of branches of Picea sitchensis to four years exposure to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. New Phytologist 144: 233-243.
  4. Berryman CA, Eamus D & Duff GA. 1994. Stomatal responses to a range of variables in two tropical tree species grown with CO2 enrichment. Journal of Experimental Botany 45: 539-546.
  5. Besford R, Mousseau M & Matteucci G. 1998. Biochemistry, physiology and biophysics of photosynthesis. In: Jarvis PG, ed. European forests and global change: the likely impacts of rising CO2 and temperature. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 29-78.
  6. Broadmeadow MSJ & Jackson SB. 2000. Growth responses of Quercus petraea, Fraxinus excelsior and Pinus sylvestris to elevated carbon dioxide, ozone and water supply. New Phytologist 146: 437-451.
  7. Centritto M, Magnani F, Lee HSJ & Jarvis PG. 1999. Interactive effects of elevated [CO2] and drought on cherry (Prunus avium) seedlings. II. Photosynthetic capacity and water relations. New Phytologist 141: 141-153.
  8. Curtis PS. 1996. A meta-analysis of leaf gas exchange and nitrogen in trees grown under elevated carbon dioxide. Plant, Cell & Environment 19: 127-137.
  9. Curtis PS & Wang X. 1998. A meta-analysis of elevated CO2 effects on woody plant mass, form, and physiology. Oecologia 113: 299-313.
  10. Drake BG, Gonzalez-Meler MA & Long SP. 1997. More efficient plants: a consequence of rising atmospheric CO2? Annual Review of plant physiology and plant molecular biology 48: 609-639.
  11. Dufrêne E, Pontailler JY & Saugier B. 1993. A branch bag technique for simultaneous CO2 enrichment and assimilation measurements on beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). Plant Cell & Environment 15: 1131-1138.
  12. Eamus D, Berryman CA & Duff GA. 1995. Assimilation, stomatal conductance, specific leaf area and chlorophyll responses to elevated CO2 of Maranthes corymbosa, a tropical rain forest species. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 20: 741-755.
  13. Ellsworth DS. 2000. Seasonal CO2 assimilation and stomatal limitations in a Pinus taeda canopy. Tree Physiology 20: 435-445.
  14. Fetcher N, Jaeger CH, Strain BR & Sionit N. 1988. Long-term elevation of atmospheric CO2 concentration and the carbon exchange rates of saplings of Pinus taeda L. & Liquidambar styraciflua L. Tree Physiology 4: 255-262.
  15. Field CB, Jackson RB & Mooney HA. 1995. Stomatal responses to increased CO2: implications from the plant to the global scale. Plant, Cell & Environment 18: 1214-1225.
  16. Freeman M. 1998. Leaf gas exchange in mature beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) exposed to long-term elevated CO2 in branch bags. PhD thesis, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Denmark.
  17. Goodfellow J, Eamus D & Duff G. 1997. Diurnal and seasonal changes in the impact of CO2 enrichment on assimilation, stomatal conductance and growth in a long-term study of Mangifera indica in the wet-dry tropics of Australia. Tree Physiology 17: 291-299.
  18. Gunderson CA, Norby RJ & Wullschleger SD. 1993. Foliar gas exchange responses of two deciduous hardwoods during 3 years of growth in elevated CO2: no loss of photosynthetic enhancement. Plant, Cell & Environment 16: 797-807.
  19. Gunderson CA & Wullschleger SD. 1994. Photosynthetic acclimation in trees to rising atmospheric CO2: a broader perspective. Photosynthesis Research 39: 369-388.
  20. Gurevitch J & Hedges LV. 1993. Meta-analysis: combining the results of independent experiments. In: Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J, eds. Design and analysis of ecological experiments. New York, USA: Chapman & Hall, 378-398.
  21. Heath J. 1998. Stomata of trees growing in CO2-enriched air show reduced sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit and drought. Plant, Cell & Environment 21: 1077-1088.
  22. Heath J & Kerstiens G. 1997. Effects of elevated CO2 on leaf gas exchange in beech and oak at two levels of nutrient supply: consequences for sensitivity to drought in beech. Plant, Cell & Environment 20: 57-67.
  23. Hedges LV, Gurevitch J & Curtis PS. 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80: 1150-1156.
  24. Hollinger DY. 1987. Gas exchange and dry matter allocation responses to elevation of atmospheric CO2 concentration in seedlings of three tree species. Tree Physiology 3: 193-202.
  25. Jarvis PG. 1976. The interpretation of the variations in leaf water potential and stomatal conductance found in canopies in the field. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B 273: 593-510.
  26. Jarvis PG. 1998. European forests and global change: the likely impacts of rising CO2 and temperature. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Johnsen KH. 1993. Growth and ecophysiological responses of black spruce seedlings to elevated CO2 under varied water and nutrient additions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 23: 1033-1042.
  28. Kellomäki S & Vaisanen H. 1997. Modelling the dynamics of the forest ecosystem for climate change studies in the boreal conditions. Ecological Modelling 97: 121-140.
  29. Kellomäki S & Wang K. 1996. Photosynthetic responses to needle water potentials in Scots pine after a four-year exposure to elevated CO2 and temperature. Tree Physiology 16: 765-772.
  30. Kellomäki S & Wang K. 1997. Photosynthetic responses of Scots pine to elevated CO2 and nitrogen supply: results of a branch-in-bag experiment. Tree Physiology 17: 231-240.
  31. Kolb TE, Fredericksen TS, Steiner KC & Skelly JM. 1997. Issues in scaling tree size and age responses to ozone: a review. Environmental Pollution 98: 195-208.
  32. Laitat E, Chermanne B & Portier B. 2000. Biomass, carbon and nitrogen allocation in open top chambers under ambient and elevated CO2 and in a mixed forest stand. A tentative approach for scaling up from the experiments of Vielsalm. In: Ceulemans R, Veroustraete F, Gond V, Van Rensbergen J, eds. Forest ecosystem modelling, upscaling and remote sensing. The Hague, The Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing bv, 33-59.
  33. Leuning R. 1995. A critical appraisal of a combined stomatal-photosynthesis model for C3 plants. Plant, Cell & Environment 18: 339-355.
  34. Liozon R, Badeck F-W, Genty B, Meyer S & Saugier B. 2000. Leaf photosynthetic characteristics of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) saplings stands during three years of CO2 exposure. Tree Physiology 20: 239-248.
  35. Liu S & Teskey RO. 1995. Responses of foliar gas exchange to long-term elevated CO2 concentrations in mature loblolly pine trees. Tree Physiology 15: 351-359.
  36. Medlyn BE, Badeck F-W, De Pury DGG, Barton CVM, Broadmeadow MSJ, Ceulemans R, De Angelis P, Forstreuter M, Jach ME, Kellomäki S, Laitat E, Marek M, Philippot S, Rey A, Strassemeyer J, Laitinen K, Liozon R, Portier B, Roberntz P, Wang K & Jarvis PG. 1999. Effects of elevated [CO2] on photosynthesis in European forest species: a meta-analysis of model parameters. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 1475-1495.
  37. Medlyn BE & Jarvis PG. 1999. Design and use of a database of model parameters from elevated [CO2] experiments. Ecological Modelling 124: 69-83.
  38. Mooney HA, Canadell J, Chapin FS, Ehleringer J, Körner Ch, McMurtrie RE, Parton WJ, Pitelka L & Schulze E-D. 1999. Ecosystem physiology responses to global change. In: Walker BH, Steffen WL, Canadell J, Ingram JSI, eds. The terrestrial biosphere and global change. Implications for natural and managed ecosystems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 141-189.
  39. Morison JIL. 1987. Intercellular CO2 concentration and stomatal response to CO2. In: Zeiger E, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD, eds. Stomatal Function. Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford University Press, 229-251.
  40. Morison JIL. 1998. Stomatal response to increased CO2 concentration. Journal of Experimental Botany 49: 443-452.
  41. Morison JIL & Gifford RM. 1983. Stomatal sensitivity to carbon dioxide and humidity. Plant Physiology 71: 789-796.
  42. Morison JIL & Gifford RM. 1984. Plant growth and water use with limited water supply in high CO2 concentrations. I. Leaf area, water use and transpiration. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 11: 361-374.
  43. Norby RJ, Wullschleger SD, Gunderson CA, Johnson DW & Ceulemans R. 1999. Tree responses to rising CO2 in field experiments: implications for the future forest. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 683-714.
  44. Oren R, Sperry JS, Katul GG, Pataki DE, Ewers BE, Phillips N & Schäfer KVR. 1999. Survey and synthesis of intra- and interspecific variation in stomatal sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 1515-1526.
  45. Pontailler J-Y, Barton CVM, Durrant D & Forstreuter M. 1998. How can we study CO2 impacts on trees and forests? In: Jarvis PG, ed. European forests and global change: the likely impacts of rising CO2 and temperature. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1-28.
  46. Pontailler J-Y, Dufrêne E, Saugier B & Saumain E. 1994. Long term CO2 enrichment and gas exchange measurement on branches of mature beeches (Fagus sylvatica L.). In: Mousseau, M, ed. Responses of trees and forests to global change. ECOCRAFT/ICAT International Symposium, Dourdan, France. Abstracts, 41.
  47. Radoglou KM, Aphalo P & Jarvis PG. 1992. Response of photosynthesis, stomatal conductance and water use efficiency to elevated CO2 and nutrient supply in acclimated seedlings of Phaseolus vulgaris L. Annals of Botany 70: 257-264.
  48. Rey A & Jarvis PG. 1998. Long-term photosynthetic acclimation to increased atmoshperic CO2 concentration in young birch (Betula pendula) trees. Tree Physiology 18: 441-450.
  49. Roberntz P & Stockfors J. 1998. Effects of elevated CO2 concentration and nutrition on net photosynthesis, stomatal conductance and needle respiration of field-grown Norway spruce trees. Tree Physiology 18: 233-241.
  50. Rosenberg MS, Adams DC & Gurevitch J. 1997. Metawin: statistical software for meta-analysis with resampling tests, version 1.0. Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Associates.
  51. Sage RF. 1994. Acclimation of photosynthesis to increasing atmospheric CO2: the gas-exchange perspective. Photosynthesis Research 39: 351-368.
  52. Santrucek J & Sage RF. 1996. Acclimation of stomatal conductance to a CO2-enriched atmosphere and elevated temperature in Chenopodium album. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 23: 467-478.
  53. Saxe H, Ellsworth DS & Heath J. 1998. Tree and forest functioning in an enriched CO2 atmosphere. New Phytologist 139: 395-436.
  54. Scarascia-Mugnozza GE, De Angelis P, Matteucci G & Kuzminsky E. 1996. Carbon metabolism and plant growth under elevated CO2 in a natural Quercus ilex macchia stand. In: Koch GW, Mooney HA, eds. Carbon dioxide and terrestrial ecosystems. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press, 209-230.
  55. Sellers PJ, Bounoua L, Collatz GJ, Randall DA, Dazlich DA, Los SO, Berry JA, Fung I, Tucker CJ, Field CB & Jensen TG. 1996. Comparison of radiative and physiological effects of doubled atmospheric CO2 on climate. Science 271: 1402-1406.
  56. Sigurdsson BD, Thorgeirsson H & Linder S. 2001. Growth and dry-matter partitioning of young Populus trichocarpa trees during three years of elevated fertilisation. Tree Physiology. (In press.)
  57. Strassemeyer J & Forstreuter M. 1997. Parameterization of a leaf gas-exchange model for Fagus sylvatica L. using microcosms grown under ambient and elevated CO2. Landschaftsentwicklung and Umweltforschung 107: 61-72.
  58. Surano KA, Daley PF, Houpis JLJ, Shinn JH, Helms JA, Palassou RJ & Costella MP. 1986. Growth and physiological responses of Pinus ponderosa Dougl. Ex P. Laws. to long-term elevated CO2 concentrations. Tree Physiology 2: 243-259.
  59. Thornley JHM & Cannell MGR. 1996. Temperate forest responses to carbon dioxide, temperature and nitrogen: a model analysis. Plant, Cell & Environment 19: 1331-1348.
  60. Tissue DT, Thomas RB & Strain BR. 1997. Atmospheric CO2 enrichment increases growth and photosynthesis of Pinus taeda: a 4 year experiment in the field. Plant, Cell & Environment 20: 1123-1134.
  61. Tognetti R, Longobucco A, Miglietta F & Raschi A. 1998. Transpiration and stomatal behaviour of Quercus ilex plants during the summer in a Mediterranean carbon dioxide spring. Plant, Cell & Environment 21: 613-622.
  62. Tuba Z, Szente K & Koch J. 1994. Response of photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, water use efficiency and production to long-term elevated CO2 in winter wheat. Journal of Plant Physiology 144: 661-668.
  63. Van Wijk MT, Dekker SC, Bouten W, Bosveld FC, Kohsiek W, Kramer K & Mohren GMJ. 2000. Modeling daily gas exchange of a Douglas-fir forest: comparison of three stomatal conductance models with and without a soil water stress function. Tree Physiology 20: 115-122.
  64. Will RE & Ceulemans R. 1997. Effects of elevated CO2 concentration on photosynthesis, respiration and carbohydrate status of coppice Populus hybrids. Physiologia Plantarum 100: 933-939.
  65. Will RE & Teskey RO. 1997. Effect of irradiance and vapour pressure deficit on stomatal response to CO2 enrichment of four tree species. Journal of Experimental Botany 48: 2095-2102.
  66. Wong SC, Cowan IR & Farquhar GD. 1978. Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282: 424-426.
Article Info
Journal
The New phytologist
Abbr.
New Phytol
ISSN
1469-8137
DOI
10.1046/j.1469-8137.2001.00028.x
Published
2001-02-00
Pages
247-264
Language
English
Region
England
NLM ID
9882884
Subset
IM
External Links
PubMed source DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2001.00028.x View journal details
Analysis Services
Analysis Services

Contact

No. 2 Wenbo Road, Zhangqiu District, Jinan, Shandong

Qilu Normal University · Genelibs Bioinformatics Lab

750 Shunhua Rd, Jinan

2F, Bldg F, University Science Park

Tel: 0531-88819269

WeChat Official Account

Follow our WeChat subscription account for real-time updates and the latest in medical and biological research.


Business Email

E-mail: product@genelibs.com

Copyright © 2026.Genelibs Jinan Honghui Biotechnology Co., Ltd. 鲁ICP备20007159号-2