The use of trade and company names in this paper is for the benefit of the reader; such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of any service or product by the US Department of Agriculture or by the California Air Resources Board to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
Estimating canopy conductance to ozone uptake from observations of evapotranspiration at the canopy scale and at the leaf scale*
Article first published online: 27 APR 2006
Global Change Biology
Volume 1, Issue 3, pages 183–198, June 1995
How to Cite
MASSMAN, W.J. and GRANTZ, D.A. (1995), Estimating canopy conductance to ozone uptake from observations of evapotranspiration at the canopy scale and at the leaf scale. Global Change Biology, 1: 183–198. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.1995.tb00020.x
- Issue published online: 27 APR 2006
- Article first published online: 27 APR 2006
- Received SO March 1995; revision accepted 8 June 1995
- canopy conductance;
- leaf-to-canopy scaling;
- ozone deposition
Stomatal uptake by vegetation is often the major sink for the destruction of tropospheric ozone. Using data obtained during the summer of 1991 at a grape vineyard and a cotton field in the San Joaquin Valley of California, we compare canopy (stomatal) conductances to ozone estimated (1) from eddy covariance ozone flux data (2) from eddy covariance evapotranspiration data and (3) by scaling leaf trans pi rational conductance to the canopy level using a canopy radiative transfer model. These simultaneous data, obtained at two levels of biological organization and for two trace gases, allow us to contrast the pathways for canopy-atmosphere exchange of water vapour and ozone, to evaluate limitations to scaling from leaf to canopy, and to predict ozone uptake parameters from those governing transpiration. At the vineyard site the eddy covariance ozone results underestimate the ET-based (eddy covariance and leaf scaling) approaches between 25% and 36%. At the cotton site the ozone-based results overestimate the ET-based approaches between 9% and 62%. A number of modelling and measurement uncertainties are of appropriate magnitude to reconcile these estimates. Some of the possible causes for these discrepancies that are discussed include NO effects, mesophyll resistances to ozone uptake and flaws in the K-theory (first-order closure) approach on which the canopy-scale analysis is based. Nevertheless, both canopy and single leaf measurements of conductance for water vapour provide acceptable estimates of conductance for ozone, but further experiments in which all are measured simultaneously are suggested.