Rising CO2 and warming reduce global canopy demand for nitrogen
Summary Nitrogen (N) limitation has been considered as a constraint on terrestrial carbon uptake in response to rising CO2 and climate change. By extension, it has been suggested that declining carboxylation capacity (Vcmax) and leaf N content in enhanced‐CO2 experiments and satellite records signif...
Saved in:
Published in | The New phytologist Vol. 235; no. 5; pp. 1692 - 1700 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Lancaster
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01.09.2022
Wiley |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Summary
Nitrogen (N) limitation has been considered as a constraint on terrestrial carbon uptake in response to rising CO2 and climate change. By extension, it has been suggested that declining carboxylation capacity (Vcmax) and leaf N content in enhanced‐CO2 experiments and satellite records signify increasing N limitation of primary production. We predicted Vcmax using the coordination hypothesis and estimated changes in leaf‐level photosynthetic N for 1982–2016 assuming proportionality with leaf‐level Vcmax at 25°C. The whole‐canopy photosynthetic N was derived using satellite‐based leaf area index (LAI) data and an empirical extinction coefficient for Vcmax, and converted to annual N demand using estimated leaf turnover times. The predicted spatial pattern of Vcmax shares key features with an independent reconstruction from remotely sensed leaf chlorophyll content. Predicted leaf photosynthetic N declined by 0.27% yr−1, while observed leaf (total) N declined by 0.2–0.25% yr−1. Predicted global canopy N (and N demand) declined from 1996 onwards, despite increasing LAI. Leaf‐level responses to rising CO2, and to a lesser extent temperature, may have reduced the canopy requirement for N by more than rising LAI has increased it. This finding provides an alternative explanation for declining leaf N that does not depend on increasing N limitation.
See also the Commentary on this article by Smith, 235: 1683–1685. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | 1683–1685 235 See also the Commentary on this article by . Smith ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 USDOE AC02-05CH11231 |
ISSN: | 0028-646X 1469-8137 1469-8137 |
DOI: | 10.1111/nph.18076 |