Evapotranspiration, Canopy Temperature, and Plant Water Relations

  • B. A. Kimball
  • C. J. Bernacchi
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 187)

17.7 Conclusions

Because e[CO2] causes partial stomatal closure, transpiration from plant leaves is reduced, which has many ramifications for plant water relations, which can be summarized as follows:
  • The reduction in leaf transpiration reduces evaporative cooling with a consequential rise in canopy temperatures. Increases of 0.3–1.7 °C at CO2 concentrations of 550 ppm (200 ppm above current concentrations) have been observed, depending on species and conditions. Such canopy temperature changes are likely to cause shifts in the optimum geographic climate areas for growth of crops and other species.

  • The reduction in transpiration per unit of leaf area with e[CO2] generally leads to a reduction in ET per unit of land area. However, the magnitude of such water conservation at e[CO2] varies with the degree of stimulation of plant growth and the degree of partial stomatal closure. Observed reductions in ET have ranged from near zero for cotton, a woody C3 species with large growth stimulation, to about 16 % for sorghum, a C4 grass with little growth stimulation. In the absence of global warming, such water conservation will reduce the water requirements of irrigated regions, and with global warming, it will help to keep the requirements from rising as much as the warming alone would cause.

  • The reductions in ET with e[CO2] will also lead to increases in soil moisture content, with consequent effects on numerous soil physical, chemical, and biological processes that are influenced by soil moisture content, such as leaching, mineralization, and soil respiration.

  • The reductions in ET and consequent increases in soil moisture can lead to improvements in plant water relations, such as higher plant water potentials. Water conservation with growth in e[CO2] can enable plants to maintain growth longer into drought cycles.


Soil Water Content Soil Respiration Stomatal Conductance Canopy Temperature Stomatal Resistance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adamsen FJ, Wechsung G, Wechsung F, Wall GW, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, LaMorte RL, Garcia RL, Hunsaker DJ, Leavit SW (2005) Temporal changes in soil and biomass nitrogen for irrigated wheat grown under free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE). Agron J 97:160–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhattacharya NC, Radin JW, Kimball BA, Mauney JR, Hendrey GR, Nagy J, Lewin KF, Ponce DC (1994) Leaf water relations of cotton in a free-air CO2-enriched environment. Agric For Meteorol 70:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Conley MM, Kimball BA, Brooks TJ, Pinter PJ Jr, Hunsaker DJ, Wall GW, Adam NR, LaMorte RL, Matthias AD, Thompson TL, Leavitt SW, Ottman MJ, Cousins AB, Triggs JM (2001) CO2 enrichment increases water-use efficiency in sorghum. New Phytol 151:407–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ellsworth DS (1999) CO2 enrichment in a maturing pine forest: are CO2 exchange and water status in the canopy affected? Plant Cell Environ 22:461–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grant RF, Kimball BA, Brooks TJ, Wall GW, Pinter PJ Jr, Hunsaker DJ, Adamsen FJ, LaMorte RL, Leavitt SW, Thompson TL, Matthias AD (2001) Interactions among CO2, N, and climate on energy exchange of wheat: model theory and testing with a free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) experiment. Agron J 93:638–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hunsaker DJ, Hendrey GR, Kimball BA, Lewin KF, Mauney JR, Nagy J (1994) Cotton evapotranspiration under field conditions with CO2 enrichment and variable soil moisture regimes. Agric For Meteorol 70:247–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hunsaker DJ, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, LaMorte RL, Wall GW (1996) Carbon dioxide enrichment and irrigation effects on wheat evapotranspiration and water use efficiency. Trans ASAE 39:1345–1355Google Scholar
  8. Hunsaker DJ, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, Wall GW, LaMorte RL, Adamsen FJ, Leavitt SW, Thompson TL, Matthias AD, Brooks TJ (2000) CO2 enrichment and soil nitrogen effects on wheat evapotranspiration and water use efficiency. Agric For Meteorol 104:85–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Contribution from working group I to the third assessment report, inter-governmental panel for climate change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Jarvis PG, McNaughton KG (1986) Stomatal control of transpiration: scaling up from leaf to region. Adv Ecol Res 15:1–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kammann C, Grunhage L, Gruters U, Janze S, Jager H-J (2005) Response of aboveground grassland biomass and soil moisture to moderate long-term CO2 enrichment. Basic Appl Ecol (in press)Google Scholar
  12. Kimball BA (2006) Global changes and water resources. In: Lascano RJ, Sojka RE (eds) Irrigation of agricultural crops monograph. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wis. (in press)Google Scholar
  13. Kimball BA, LaMorte RL, Pinter PJ Jr, Wall GW, Hunsaker DJ, Adamsen FJ, Leavitt SW, Thompson TL, Matthias AD, Brooks TJ (1999) Free-air CO2 enrichment and soil nitrogen effects on energy balance and evapotranspiration of wheat. Water Resour Res 35:1179–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kimball BA, Kobayashi K, Bindi M (2002) Responses of agricultural crops to free-air CO2 enrichment. Adv Agron 77:293–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lawlor DW, Mitchell RAC (1991) The effects of increasing CO2 on crop photosynthesis and productivity: a review of field studies. Plant Cell Environ 14:807–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Magliulo V, Bindi M, Rana G (2003) Water use of irrigated potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) grown under free air carbon dioxide enrichment in central Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 97:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgan PB, Bollero GA, Nelson RL, Dohleman FG, Long SP (2005) Smaller than predicted increase in aboveground net primary production and yield of field-grown soybean under fully open-air [CO2] elevation. Global Change Biol 11:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ottman MJ, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, Wall GW, Vanderlip RL, Leavitt SW, LaMorte RL, Matthias AD, Brooks TJ (2001) Elevated CO2 effects on sorghum growth and yield at high and low soil water content. New Phytol 150:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Raschi A, Bindi M, Longobucco A, Miglietta F, Moriondo M (1996) Water relations of Vitis vinifera L. plants growing under elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations in a FACE setup. In: European Society for Agronomy (ed) Proceedings congress of the European society for agronomy, 7–11 July 1996. European Society for Agronomy, Wageningen, pp 54–55Google Scholar
  20. Samarakoon AB, Gifford RM (1995) Soil water content under plants at high CO2 concentration and interactions with direct CO2 effects: a species comparison. J Biogeogr 22:193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sellers PJ, Bounoua L, Collatz GJ, Randall DA, Dazlitch DA, Los SO, Berry JA, Fung I, Tucker CJ, Field CB, Jensen GG (1996) Comparison of radiative and physiological effects of doubled atmospheric CO2 on climate. Science 271:1402–1406Google Scholar
  22. Tommasi PD, Magliulo V, Dell’Aquila R, Miglietta F, Zaldei A, Gaylor G (2002) Water consumption of a CO2 enriched poplar stand. Atti del Convegno CNR-ISAFOM, ErcolanoGoogle Scholar
  23. Triggs JM, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, Wall GW, Conley MM, Brooks TJ, LaMorte RL, Adam NR, Ottman MJ, Matthias AD, Leavitt SW, Cerveny RS (2004) Free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) effects on energy balance and evapotranspiration of sorghum. Agric For Meteorol 124:63–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wall GW, Kimball BA, Hunsaker DJ, Garcia RL, Pinter PJ Jr, Idso SB, LaMorte RL (1994) Diurnal trends in total water potential of leaves of spring wheat grown in a free-air CO2-enriched (FACE) atmosphere and under variable soil moisture regimes. In: US Water Conservation Laboratory (ed) Annual research report. USDA-ARS, Phoenix, Ariz., pp 73–76Google Scholar
  25. Wall GW, Brooks TJ, Adam NR, Cousins AB, Kimball BA, Pinter PJ Jr, PJ, LaMorte RL, Triggs J, Ottman MJ, Leavitt SW, Matthias AD, Williams DG, Webber AN (2001) Elevated atmospheric CO2 improved sorghum plant water status by ameliorating the adverse effects of drought. New Phytol 152:231–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walter IA, Allen RG, Elliott R, Jensen M E, Itenfisu D, Mecham B, Howell TA, Snyder R, Brown P, Echings S, Spofford T, Hattendorf M, Cuenca RH, Wright JL, Martin D (2000) ASCE’s standardized reference evapotranspiration equation. In: Evans RG, Benham BL, Trooien TP (eds) National irrigation symposium, proceedings of the fourth decennial symposium. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Mich., pp 209–214Google Scholar
  27. Wullschleger SD, Norby RJ (2001) Sap velocity and canopy transpiration in a sweetgum stand exposed to free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE). New Phytol 150:489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wullschleger SD, Tschaplinski TJ, Norby RJ (2002) Plant water relations at elevated CO2 — implications for water-limited environments. Plant Cell Environ 25:319–331PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yoshimoto M, Oue H, Kobayashi K (2005) Responses of energy balance, evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency of canopies to free-air CO2 enrichment. Agric For Meteorol 133:226–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. A. Kimball
    • 1
  • C. J. Bernacchi
    • 2
  1. 1.United States Arid-Land Agricultural Research Center, Agricultural Research ServiceUnited States Department of AgricultureMaricopaUSA
  2. 2.Illinois State Water SurveyCenter for Atmospheric SciencesChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations