Advertisement

Scaling-Up Gas Exchange and Energy Balance from the Leaf to the Canopy Level

  • Hans Lambers
  • F. Stuart ChapinIII
  • Thijs L. Pons

Abstract

Having discussed the gas exchange and energy balance of individual leaves in previous chapters, we are now in a position to “scale up” to the canopy level. In moving between scales, it is important to determine which interactions are strong enough to be considered and which can be ignored. The water relations of plant canopies differ distinctly from what would be predicted from the study of individual leaves, because each leaf modifies the environment of adjacent leaves by reducing irradiance and wind speed, and either decreasing or increasing vapor pressure deficit, depending on transpiration rates.

Keywords

Stomatal Conductance Individual Leaf Leaf Area Ratio Canopy Level Canopy Photosynthesis 
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.

References

  1. Anten, N.P.R., Schieving, F., & Werger, M.J.A. 1995. Patterns of light and nitrogen distribution in relation to whole canopy gain in C3 and C4 mono- and dicotyledonous species. Oecologia 101: 504–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balisky, A.C. & Burton, P.J. 1995. Root-zone temperature variation associated with microsite characteristics in high-elevation forest openings in the interior of British Columbia. Agric. For. Meteor. 7: 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Condon, A.G., Richards, R.A., & Farquhar, G.D. 1993. Relationships between carbon isotope discrimination, water use efficiency and transpiration efficiency for dryland wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44: 1693–1711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cowan, I.R. 1968. Mass, heat and momentum exchange between stands of plants and their atmospheric environment. Q. J. R. Meteor. Soc. 94: 523–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowan, I.R. 1988. Stomatal physiology and gas exchange in the field. In: Flow and Transport in the natural environment: advances and applications, W.L. Steffen & O.T. Denmead (eds). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 160–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. de Pury, D.G.G. 1995. Scaling photosynthesis and water use from leaves to paddocks. PhD Thesis, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
  7. de Pury, D.G.G. & Farquhar, G.D. 1997. Simple scaling of photosynthesis from leaves to canopies without the errors of big-leaf models. Plant Cell Environ. 20: 537–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ehleringer, J.R. & Field, C.B. (eds) 1993. Scaling physiological processes: leaf to globe. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, J.R. 1993. Photosynthetic acclimation and nitrogen partitioning within a lucerne canopy. II. Stability through time and comparison with a theoretical optimum. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 20: 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Field, C. 1983. Allocating leaf nitrogen for the maximization of carbon gain: leaf age as a control on the allocation programme. Oecologia 56: 341–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Field, C.B. 1991. Ecological scaling of carbon gain to stress and resource availability. In: Response of plants to multiple stress, H.A. Mooney, W.E. Winner, & E.J. Pell (eds). Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 35–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grace, J.B. 1983. Plant-atmosphere relationships. Chapman & Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Graetz, R.D. 1991. The nature and significance of the feedback of change in terrestrial vegetation on global atmospheric and climatic change. Climatic Change 18: 147–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hirose, T. & Werger, M.J.A. 1987. Maximising daily canopy photosynthesis with respect to the leaf nitrogen allocation pattern in the canopy. Oecologia 72: 520–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jarvis, P.G. & McNaughton, K.G. 1986. Stomatal control of transpiration: scaling up from leaf to region. Adv. Ecol. Res. 15:1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jarvis, P.G., Miranda, H.S., & Muetzenfeldt, R.I. 1985. Modelling canopy exchanges of water vapour and carbon dioxide in coniferous forest plantations. In: The forest-atmosphere interaction, B.A. Hutchison & B.B. Hicks (eds). Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 521–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones, H.G. 1983. Plant and Microclimate. A quantitative approach to environmental physiology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  18. Lloyd, J., Grace, J.B., Wong, S.C., Styles, J.M., Batten, D., Priddle, R., Turnbull, C., & McConchie, C.A. 1995a. Measuring and modelling whole-tree gas exchange. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 22: 987–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lloyd, J., Grace, Miranda, A.C., Meir, P., Wong, S.C., Miranda, H.S., Wright, I.R., Cash, J.H.C., & McIntyre, J. 1995b. A simple calibrated model of Amazonan rainforest productivity based on leaf biochemical properties. Plant Cell Environ. 18: 1129–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McMurtrie, R.E. 1993. Modelling of canopy carbon and water balance. In: Photosynthesis and production in a changing environment: a field and laboratory manual, D.A. Hall, J.M.O. Scurlock, H.R. Bolhar-Nordenkampf, R.C. Leegood, & S.P. Long (eds). Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 220–231.Google Scholar
  21. Mercado, L.M., Huntingford, C., Gash, J.H.C., Cox, P.M., Jogireddy, V. 2007. Improving the representation of radiation interception and photosynthesis for climate model applications. Tellus B 59, 553–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Monteith, J.L. 1963. Gas exchange in plant communities. In: Environmental control of plant growth, L.T. Evans (ed). Academic Press, New York, pp. 95–112.Google Scholar
  23. Monteith, J.L. 1965. Evaporation and environment. Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 19: 205–234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Monteith, J.L. 1973. Principles of environmental physics. Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  25. Penman, H.L. 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proc. R. Soc. London Series A 193: 120–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pons, T.L., Schieving, F., Hirose, T., & Werger, M.J.A. 1989. Optimization of leaf nitrogen allocation for canopy photosynthesis in Lysimachia vulgaris. In: Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants, H. Lambers, M.L. Cambridge, H. Konings, & T.L. Pons (eds). SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp. 175–186.Google Scholar
  27. Raupach, M.R. 1995. Vegetation-atmosphere interaction and surface conductance at leaf, canopy and regional scales. Agric. For. Meteor. 73: 151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Raupach, M.R. & Finnigan, J.J. 1988. “Single-layer” models of evaporation from plant canopies are incorrect but useful, whereas multilayer models are correct but useless. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 15: 705–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ryan, M.G., Philips, N., & Bond, B.J. 2006. The hydraulic limitation hypothesis revisited. Plant Cell Environ. 29: 367–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Siddique, K.H.M., Belford, R.K., & Tennant, D. 1990. Root: shoot ratios of old and modern, tall and semi-dwarf wheats in a mediterranean environment. Plant Soil 121: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van den Boogaard, R., Alewijnse, D., Veneklaas, E.J., & Lambers, H. 1997. Growth and water use efficiency of ten Triticum aestivum L. cultivars at different water availability in relation to allocation of biomass. Plant Cell Environ. 20: 200–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Williams, M., Rastetter, E.B., Fernandes, D.N., Goulden, M.L., Wofsy, S.C., Shaver, G.R., Melillo, J.M., Munger, J.W., Fan, S.-M., & Nadelhoffer, K.J. 1996. Modelling the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in a Quercus-Acer stand at Harvest Forest: the regulation of stomatal conductance by light, nitrogen and soil/plant hydraulic properties. Plant Cell Environ. 19: 911–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Lambers
    • 1
  • F. Stuart ChapinIII
    • 2
  • Thijs L. Pons
    • 3
  1. 1.The University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  2. 2.University of AlaskaFairbanksUSA
  3. 3.Utrecht UniversityThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations