12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Response to Comment on “Mycorrhizal association as a primary control of the CO2fertilization effect”

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Forest response to elevated CO2 is conserved across a broad range of productivity.

          Climate change predictions derived from coupled carbon-climate models are highly dependent on assumptions about feedbacks between the biosphere and atmosphere. One critical feedback occurs if C uptake by the biosphere increases in response to the fossil-fuel driven increase in atmospheric [CO(2)] ("CO(2) fertilization"), thereby slowing the rate of increase in atmospheric [CO(2)]. Carbon exchanges between the terrestrial biosphere and atmosphere are often first represented in models as net primary productivity (NPP). However, the contribution of CO(2) fertilization to the future global C cycle has been uncertain, especially in forest ecosystems that dominate global NPP, and models that include a feedback between terrestrial biosphere metabolism and atmospheric [CO(2)] are poorly constrained by experimental evidence. We analyzed the response of NPP to elevated CO(2) ( approximately 550 ppm) in four free-air CO(2) enrichment experiments in forest stands. We show that the response of forest NPP to elevated [CO(2)] is highly conserved across a broad range of productivity, with a stimulation at the median of 23 +/- 2%. At low leaf area indices, a large portion of the response was attributable to increased light absorption, but as leaf area indices increased, the response to elevated [CO(2)] was wholly caused by increased light-use efficiency. The surprising consistency of response across diverse sites provides a benchmark to evaluate predictions of ecosystem and global models and allows us now to focus on unresolved questions about carbon partitioning and retention, and spatial variation in NPP response caused by availability of other growth limiting resources.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            CO2 enhancement of forest productivity constrained by limited nitrogen availability.

            Stimulation of terrestrial plant production by rising CO(2) concentration is projected to reduce the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO(2) emissions. Coupled climate-carbon cycle models are sensitive to this negative feedback on atmospheric CO(2), but model projections are uncertain because of the expectation that feedbacks through the nitrogen (N) cycle will reduce this so-called CO(2) fertilization effect. We assessed whether N limitation caused a reduced stimulation of net primary productivity (NPP) by elevated atmospheric CO(2) concentration over 11 y in a free-air CO(2) enrichment (FACE) experiment in a deciduous Liquidambar styraciflua (sweetgum) forest stand in Tennessee. During the first 6 y of the experiment, NPP was significantly enhanced in forest plots exposed to 550 ppm CO(2) compared with NPP in plots in current ambient CO(2), and this was a consistent and sustained response. However, the enhancement of NPP under elevated CO(2) declined from 24% in 2001-2003 to 9% in 2008. Global analyses that assume a sustained CO(2) fertilization effect are no longer supported by this FACE experiment. N budget analysis supports the premise that N availability was limiting to tree growth and declining over time--an expected consequence of stand development, which was exacerbated by elevated CO(2). Leaf- and stand-level observations provide mechanistic evidence that declining N availability constrained the tree response to elevated CO(2); these observations are consistent with stand-level model projections. This FACE experiment provides strong rationale and process understanding for incorporating N limitation and N feedback effects in ecosystem and global models used in climate change assessments.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mycorrhizal association as a primary control of the CO₂ fertilization effect.

              Plants buffer increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations through enhanced growth, but the question whether nitrogen availability constrains the magnitude of this ecosystem service remains unresolved. Synthesizing experiments from around the world, we show that CO2 fertilization is best explained by a simple interaction between nitrogen availability and mycorrhizal association. Plant species that associate with ectomycorrhizal fungi show a strong biomass increase (30 ± 3%, P < 0.001) in response to elevated CO2 regardless of nitrogen availability, whereas low nitrogen availability limits CO2 fertilization (0 ± 5%, P = 0.946) in plants that associate with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. The incorporation of mycorrhizae in global carbon cycle models is feasible, and crucial if we are to accurately project ecosystem responses and feedbacks to climate change.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Science
                Science
                American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
                0036-8075
                1095-9203
                January 26 2017
                January 26 2017
                : 355
                : 6323
                : 358.3-358
                Article
                10.1126/science.aai8242
                9c680a95-70b5-4ff8-9a1c-cb6695e80ba4
                © 2017

                http://www.sciencemag.org/about/science-licenses-journal-article-reuse

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article