SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • carbohydrate content;
  • elevated CO2;
  • global warming;
  • nocturnal warming;
  • photosynthesis;
  • Populus deltoides (cottonwood);
  • respiration;
  • temperature

Summary

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
  • • 
    We measured night-time respiration and daytime photosynthesis of leaves in canopies of 4 m tall cottonwood (Populus deltoides) trees to investigate the link between leaf respiration and photosynthetic capacity.
  • • 
    Trees were grown at three CO2 partial pressures [p(CO2)a] (42, 80, 120 Pa) and experimentally exposed to differing nocturnal temperatures (15, 20 or 25°C), but constant daytime temperatures (30–32°C), in a short-term whole-ecosystem environmental manipulation.
  • • 
    Rates of night-time leaf dark respiration (Rd) increased significantly at all growth CO2 partial pressures when nocturnal temperatures were increased from 15 to 25°C. Predawn leaf nonstructural carbohydrate (soluble sugars and starch) content was significantly lower at the higher night temperatures. Photosynthetic capacity (Amax) during the day increased significantly between 15 and 25°C at 42 and 80 Pa, but not at 120 Pa.
  • • 
    These findings indicate that the previously determined relationships between elevated night-time temperature, dark respiration and increased photosynthetic capacity may also hold at elevated p(CO2)a. This response may have a significant influence on plant and ecosystem carbon exchange under global change scenarios.

Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Global climate records show potentially important nonuniform changes in surface temperatures at a variety of spatial and temporal scales (Easterling et al., 1997; Alward et al., 1999; IPCC, 2001). For example, warming on land has been significantly more pronounced at night, increasing by approx. 0.2°C per decade between 1950 and 1993, or nearly twice the rate of increase in daytime maximum air temperature (IPCC, 2001). This strong diel pattern in the rate of warming means that photosynthesis and respiration are necessarily responding to fundamentally different temperature signals, and points to a clear need to investigate the direct and indirect impacts of nocturnal warming on plant carbon relations. We have previously shown that elevated night temperatures at ambient CO2 partial pressures can increase leaf photosynthesis during the following day (Turnbull et al., 2002). This impact of nocturnal warming on photosynthesis was significantly greater than the impact of daytime warming, and was a result of the alleviation of ‘feedback inhibition’ (Stitt et al., 1987) of photosynthesis by an increase in the rate of utilization or export of photosynthates (Turnbull et al., 2002).

In addition to temperature, global environmental change also involves a significant increase in CO2 partial pressure [p(CO2)a]. Therefore temperature impacts on the response of photosynthesis to elevated p(CO2)a are also likely to be important (Morison & Lawlor, 1999). Although there are sound theoretical reasons for expecting stimulation of photosynthesis by elevated p(CO2)a at higher operational (daytime) temperatures (Long, 1991; McMurtrie & Wang, 1993; Teskey, 1997; Ziska & Bunce, 1997), there is surprisingly little data supporting this unequivocally (Morison & Lawlor, 1999). Perhaps more importantly, very few studies have considered the indirect and interactive impact of nocturnal temperature and elevated p(CO2)a. Elevated nocturnal temperatures could well enhance the photosynthetic response of plants to elevated CO2 partial pressures through increased respiration, as the accumulation of leaf carbohydrates is one of the most ubiquitous plant responses to elevated CO2 (Körner & Miglietta, 1994; Wurth et al., 1998; Moore et al., 1999). Here we extend our previous study (Turnbull et al., 2002) by presenting the findings of an experiment conducted to determine the short-term response of leaf respiration and photosynthesis to increasing nocturnal temperature in cottonwood (Populus deltoides) trees growing at elevated p(CO2)a. We hypothesized that elevated night-time temperature should enhance the response of photosynthesis to elevated p(CO2)a through a reduction in carbohydrate feedback inhibition.

Materials and Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Growth conditions and experimental design

This experiment was undertaken at the Biosphere 2 Research Centre of Columbia University near Tucson, Arizona (1200 m a.s.l.; 32.5°N latitude). Details of the Biosphere 2 environmental control system are described elsewhere (Lin et al., 1998; Dempster, 1999; Zabel et al., 1999; Griffin et al., 2002a). Environmental control within the large experimental chambers is described previously by Turnbull et al. (2002). This experiment adds to our previous research (Turnbull et al., 2002, conducted at ambient p(CO2)a) by investigating the impact of changes in night-time temperature, independent of daytime temperature (kept at a constant 30–32°C) on the response of photosynthesis to elevated growth p(CO2)a. During daylight hours, CO2 control within the three bays was maintained at a separate set point (ambient at 42 Pa and two elevated treatments of 80 and 120 Pa). At night the CO2 partial pressure was maintained at 8 Pa above day set point. Within the glass and metal structure, photon flux density (PFD) was > 70% of that outside, with midday levels exceeding 1600 mol m−2 s−1. The 4–5 m tall cottonwood (Populus deltoides Bartr.) trees used in this experiment had grown for 3 yr in the CO2 treatments and are described by Turnbull et al. (2002).

The experiment was conducted in early summer (early June 2000, leaf age 2–3 months) and the protocol we followed was similar to that described previously by Turnbull et al. (2002) with the addition of elevated p(CO2)a treatments. Trees were acclimated to long-term exposure to a night/day temperature regime of 21/31°C for 3 wk before commencement of the experiment. Trees in each of the CO2 treatments were then exposed to three sequential night-time temperature regimes (15, 20 and 25°C) at a constant day temperature of 30–32°C for a period of 3 d at each temperature. The experiment was thus conducted over a 9 d period and trees did not experience night temperatures more than approx. ±5°C from the pre-experiment long-term set point. At ambient p(CO2)a, the light-saturated rate of photosynthesis (Amax) at the middle temperature set point of 20/31°C (27.8 mol m−2 s−1) did not differ significantly from that at the pre-experiment 21/31°C (night/day) long-term temperature regime (26.3 mol m−2 s−1; V. Terwilliger, unpublished data).

Respiration, photosynthesis and leaf measurements

Measurements of leaf dark respiration (before sunrise) and photosynthesis (between 1000 and 1200 h) were made on fully expanded, fully sunlit leaves from the mid-canopy of each experimental tree (at approx. 2–3 m high). At least 12 leaves (from at least two separate branches on six individual trees) were measured. Leaf dark respiration and photosynthesis (ACi response curves) were measured using infrared gas analysis systems (Li-Cor model 6400, Lincoln, NE, USA) and analysed as described by Turnbull et al. (2002). Carbohydrate analyses were performed on leaf disks taken from leaves adjacent to those used for gas-exchange measurements as described previously (Turnbull et al., 2002). Daily percentage turnover of soluble sugars and starch was calculated by:

  • Carbohydrate turnover = value at sunset − value at sunrise × 100/value at sunset

Other leaf analyses were determined on material harvested directly following gas-exchange measurements. Specific leaf area (SLA) was calculated following determination of individual leaf area and dry weight at midday. SLA was significantly lower at elevated growth p(CO2)a, and ranged from 16.6 m2 kg−1 at 42 Pa to 11.5 m2 kg−1 at 120 Pa. Leaf nitrogen content was determined on dried and ground material using a CNS autoanalyser (Carlo Erba NA 1500, Milan, Italy), and was also significantly influenced by growth CO2 partial pressure, with Nmass decreasing (2.80 mmol g−1 at 42 Pa to 2.16 mmol g−1 at 120 Pa) and Narea increasing (170 mmol m−2 at 42 Pa to 189 mmol m−2 at 120 Pa) at elevated p(CO2)a.

Statistical analysis

Split-plot anova with one level of nesting was used to test for the effects of both growth p(CO2)a and night-time temperature regime on respiration, carbohydrate concentration and photosynthesis (s-plus version 3.3, MathSoft, Seattle, USA). All responses were tested for assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance, and in no case was transformation required. The p(CO2)a effect was tested using tree as the appropriate error, with leaf nested within tree used to account for tree-level vs leaf-level variation in measured responses (Underwood, 1981). Night-time temperature and the interaction of p(CO2)a with temperature were tested within the leaf level of replication, in the manner of repeated measures analysis. Differences were considered significant if probabilities (P) were < 0.05. Treatment means were compared by least significant difference (Sokal & Rohlf, 1981).

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Rates of night-time leaf dark respiration (Rd) were significantly influenced by night temperature (P < 0.0001). Rd increased over the 10°C range in nocturnal temperature at each growth p(CO2)a (from 1.16 mol m−2 s−1 at 15°C to 1.38 mol m−2 s−1 at 25°C at 42 Pa CO2; from 0.95 mol m−2 s−1 at 15°C to 1.31 mol m−2 s−1 at 25°C at 80 Pa CO2; and from 1.35 mol m−2 s−1 at 15°C to 1.55 mol m−2 s−1 at 25°C at 120 Pa CO2, Fig. 1a). These increases in Rd corresponded to an acclimated Q10 (1525°C over the 9 d experiment) of 1.20 at 42 Pa, 1.38 at 80 Pa and 1.15 at 120 Pa CO2. Leaf carbohydrates (soluble sugars and starch) were significantly influenced by CO2 treatment at sunrise and sunset, but by nocturnal temperature treatment only at sunrise (Table 1). Soluble sugars and starch were generally greater in leaves from the elevated p(CO2)a treatments. Carbohydrates measured at sunrise, following the respiration measurements, were greatest under the 15°C temperature treatment and lower at 20 and 25°C. By sunset soluble sugar and starch had increased in all leaves, more substantially so in leaves previously subjected to the higher night-time temperature treatments. Starch content in trees experiencing the 25°C night temperature increased from sunrise to sunset by 320, 80 and 83% at 42, 80 and 120 Pa CO2, respectively. However, at 15°C starch content only increased by 33, 78 and 18% at 42, 80 and 120 Pa CO2, respectively. Percentage daily turnover of starch (but not sugars) increased significantly, but not consistently, in response to increased night temperature at 42 and 80 but not 120 Pa p(CO2)a (Table 1).

image

Figure 1. (a) Night respiration, Rd and (b) maximum assimilation rate at growth p(CO2)a, Amax in the subsequent light period (measured between 1000 and 1200 h) for leaves of Populus deltoides grown at three CO2 partial pressures and exposed to three night-time temperature regimes (15, 20 and 25°C; open, hatched and closed bars, respectively). Trees were exposed to each night temperature regime for 48 h before the day of measurement. Each point is the mean (± SEM) of 12 trees. For statistical comparisons see text.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 1.  Carbohydrate contents (g m−2) at sunrise and sunset, and daily turnover (%), for leaves of Populus deltoides trees grown at three CO2 partial pressures and exposed to three night-time temperature regimes
CO2 partial pressure (Pa)Night temperature (°C)SunriseSunsetTurnover
Sugars (g m−2)Starch (g m−2)Sugars (g m−2)Starch (g m−2)Sugars (%)Starch (%)
  1. Trees were exposed to treatment temperature for 48 h before the day of measurement, with day temperature held constant at 31°C. Values shown are means (± SEM) where n = 12. Significance of treatment effect for CO2 partial pressure (CO2) and night-time temperature (T) are indicated as the value of P or as nonsignificant (ns). Different letters within columns indicate statistically different values at P < 0.05 using least significant difference test of treatment means.

42155.213.106.144.1115.831.3
(0.28)cd(0.56)c(0.22)c(0.67)c(5.7)ab(8.0)a
204.191.175.272.5018.748.1
(0.23)ab(0.21)ab(0.35)ab(0.55) ab(5.5)ab(5.6)b
253.970.505.132.1320.851.3
(0.21)a(0.09)a(0.33)a(0.30)a(5.6)ab(8.8)b
80155.022.895.895.2014.641.9
(0.17)c(0.93)c(0.24)bc(0.75)c(4.8)ab(12.4)ab
205.832.555.784.1615.234.9
(0.39)d(0.44)c(0.34)bc(0.78)c(8.2)ab(10.5)ab
254.812.296.414.1325.275.0
(0.26)bc(0.43)c(0.21)c(0.41)c(4.8)b(6.1)d
120155.845.446.346.6810.861.8
(0.32)e(1.10)d(0.32)c(0.66)d(10.3)a(12.5)cd
205.562.886.395.0916.042.2
(0.32)d(0.40)c(0.17)c(0.78)c(4.46)ab(8.0)ab
255.663.246.315.9322.645.7
(0.40)de(0.55)c(0.45)c(0.90)cd(4.37)ab(12.9)ab
anova statistics
T < 0.05< 0.001ns< 0.05ns<0.05
CO2 < 0.0001< 0.0001< 0.001< 0.0001nsns

Light-saturated photosynthesis at growth p(CO2)a (Amax) during the day (1000–1200 h) responded significantly to the night-time temperature treatment (P < 0.001). At 42 Pa, Amax was significantly greater in the 25°C night-time treatment than the 15°C treatment (P < 0.05; Fig. 1b), displaying an increase of 16%. At 80 Pa, Amax was significantly greater in the 25°C night-time treatment than the 15°C treatment (P < 0.05), displaying an increase of 12%. At 120 Pa the 4% increase was not significant. Photosynthetic parameters derived from ACi response curves showed that growth p(CO2)a had little impact other than on Rubisco-limited photosynthesis (Vcmax) (Table 2). Neither Jmax nor TPU was significantly affected by p(CO2)a. The responses of photosynthetic parameters to nocturnal temperature regime at the three growth CO2 partial pressures were consistent with that of Amax. Vcmax, Jmax and TPU increased significantly in response to the higher nocturnal temperature treatments, but only at 42 and 80 Pa (Table 2). The impact of the night-time temperature manipulation resulted in a positive correlation between Rd and night-time utilization of starch (starch turnover), and between night-time starch turnover and Amax (Fig. 2). The relationship between starch turnover and Amax did not hold in the 120 Pa treatment.

Table 2.  Gas-exchange characteristics calculated from the response of assimilation, A, to internal CO2 partial pressure, Ci, for leaves of Populus deltoides trees grown at three CO2 partial pressures and exposed to three night-time temperature regimes
CO2 partial pressure (Pa)Night temperature (°C)Vcmax (mol m−2 s−1)Jmax (mol m−2 s−1)TPU (mol m−2 s−1)
  1. Trees were exposed to treatment temperature for 48 h before the day of measurement, with day temperature held constant at 31°C. Values shown are means (± SEM) where n = 12. Significance of treatment effect for CO2 partial pressure (CO2) and night-time temperature (T) and the interaction between CO2 partial pressure and night-time temperature (T ×C) are indicated as the value of P or as nonsignificant (ns). Different letters within rows indicate statistically different values at P < 0.05 using least significant difference test of treatment means.

4215127.4206.711.4
(3.3)a(6.4)ab(0.29)ab
20130.5207.511.7
(3.3)ab(6.5)b(0.31)b
25137.5222.212.4
(2.6)c(5.2)c(0.27)c
8015125.9198.811.0
(2.0)a(4.2)a(0.18)a
20132.7209.811.7
(2.3)b(2.5)ab(0.22)b
25136.6219.212.9
(2.4)bc(4.3)c(0.28)c
12015135.0197.811.8
(6.1)b(4.3)a(0.91)b
20149.8214.612.6
(9.9)d(5.8)c(0.52)c
25140.1205.011.4
(4.0)c(6.4)b(0.41)ab
anova statistics
T < 0.01< 0.0001< 0.0001
CO2 < 0.001nsns
T × C ns0.026ns
image

Figure 2. Relationships between (a) leaf dark respiration rate and night-time starch turnover; and (b) night-time starch turnover and maximum assimilation rate at growth p(CO2)a, Amax (determined during the subsequent light period from 1000 to 1200 h) in leaves of Populus deltoides grown at 42 Pa (open symbols) and 80 Pa (closed symbols) CO2 partial pressure and exposed to three night-time temperature regimes (15, 20 and 25°C: square, upwards triangle and downwards triangle, respectively). Figures are means (± SEM) for 12 replicate leaves on six different trees at each CO2 partial pressure and night-time temperature.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

We have previously shown that changes in night temperature may have a significantly greater impact on leaf photosynthesis than changes in day temperature at ambient p(CO2)a (Turnbull et al., 2002). Here we show that this short-term nocturnal temperature effect on photosynthesis may also be displayed at elevated CO2 concentrations predicted in global change scenarios (i.e. double current partial pressures by 2100). These findings are significant in extending our appreciation of the mechanistic links between respiration and photosynthesis that may underpin plant responses to global environmental change. They indicate that plants may be more photosynthetically responsive to elevated CO2 partial pressures than has been suggested to date, on the basis of CO2-only experimental manipulations (Leverenz et al., 1999; Bruhn et al., 2000). They also point to a need to develop our understanding of the interactive effects of nocturnal temperature and CO2 concentration on the balance between assimilate supply and sink activity in trees.

Increased nocturnal temperature had a pronounced effect on patterns of leaf respiration and carbohydrate concentration. We found that Rd on an area basis was lower at an elevated p(CO2)a of 80 than 42 Pa, but was greater at 120 Pa. There is some evidence that leaf respiration declines with growth at high p(CO2)a (Amthor, 1997), although this effect is likely to depend on the basis (mass or area) on which respiration is quoted, and may well be small or not occur (Gonzalez-Meler & Siedow, 1999; Amthor, 2000; Hamilton et al., 2001; Tissue et al., 2002). Regardless of this inconsistency in the response of Rd to p(CO2)a, the effect of increasing night temperature was clear at each p(CO2)a. Although leaf respiration rates increased significantly at higher night-time temperatures, the magnitude of the response of respiration to temperature was somewhat less than has been previously published. Values of Q10 in this whole-ecosystem temperature manipulation were 1.20, 1.40 and 1.15 at 42, 80 and 120 Pa CO2, respectively. While within the range previously found for plants (Azcon-Bieto, 1992), these values are lower than observed for a range of deciduous tree species (Bolstad et al., 1999; Amthor, 2000; Gunderson et al., 2000; Turnbull et al., 2001). This difference is primarily a result of the fact that we have measured the response of acclimated respiration after 3 d at each temperature, not an instantaneous response. Under these circumstances we would expect a lower Q10 (Gifford, 2003). The differences may also be the result of differences in growth temperature, the range of temperatures used to generate response curves (Tjoelker et al., 2001), and the timing of respiration measurements. We have previously found that Q10 in the same trees at the beginning of the dark period, when leaf carbohydrate concentrations were at a maximum, was 2.10 (Griffin et al., 2002b).

Higher night temperatures and increased Rd significantly reduced predawn leaf sugar and starch content, indicating increased sink demand at both leaf and whole-plant levels (Stitt & Quick, 1989; Harley & Sharkey, 1991; Stitt & Schulze, 1994). Soluble sugar and starch concentrations were significantly lower in leaves following the highest night temperature (25°C) in the ambient CO2 treatment (42 Pa), although in the elevated p(CO2)a treatments only starch concentration was significantly lower. Although the starch pool was relatively small in leaves experiencing the higher night temperatures, its accumulation during the light period, and subsequent utilization to support higher rates of respiration in the dark period, was greater. In addition to increases in leaf respiration, we have also measured significant increases in stem respiration in response to night warming in these trees (an increase from 2.5 ± 0.28 mol m−2 stem surface area s−1 at 11°C to 9.4 at 21°C; K.L.G., unpublished data). The increase in carbohydrate utilization in trees at higher night temperatures has important implications for photosynthetic capacity.

To date, the majority of studies investigating the likely responses of photosynthesis to temperature at elevated p(CO2)a have considered the temperature at which photosynthesis operates (day temperature: Long, 1991; McMurtrie & Wang, 1993; Teskey, 1997; Ziska & Bunce, 1997). It is reasonable to predict that stimulation of photosynthesis by high p(CO2)a is larger at higher daytime temperatures based on (1) the decreased ratio of photosynthesis to photorespiration; and (2) the decreased ratio of gross photosynthesis to dark respiration (Morison & Lawlor, 1999). Here we report an impact of night temperature on photosynthesis at elevated p(CO2)a. At low night temperature Vcmax was significantly lower at elevated p(CO2)a. As we increased the nocturnal temperature experienced by trees in this whole-ecosystem manipulation, photosynthesis at both ambient (42 Pa) and elevated (80 Pa) p(CO2)a increased (i.e. Vcmax increased). This nocturnal enhancement of photosynthesis was not evident at 120 Pa. These short-term responses indicate that, at future elevated night temperatures suggested by global climate monitoring and modelling (Easterling et al., 1997; Alward et al., 1999; IPCC, 2001), net photosynthesis at elevated p(CO2)a may be increased. Furthermore, there is some evidence that the response may saturate at CO2 partial pressures greater than double current ambient levels, although further research with a greater range of treatment p(CO2)a would be needed to support this assertion. Given the direct link between processes influencing carbon uptake (photosynthesis during the day) and loss (leaf and woody tissue respiration at night), the ‘decoupling’ of night and day temperatures in a global change world may be of significance.

We found that increased photosynthetic capacity (Amax) in cottonwood was associated with lower leaf carbohydrate concentration following warmer nights. This is consistent with previous findings (Azcon-Bieto & Osmond, 1983; Stitt & Quick, 1989; Harley & Sharkey, 1991; Azcon-Bieto, 1993; Stitt & Schulze, 1994). More specifically, Amax was positively correlated with leaf starch turnover. A number of direct and indirect feedback mechanisms have been proposed to regulate photosynthetic capacity (Krapp & Stitt, 1995). Indirect feedback mechanisms include downregulation of gene expression mediated by increases in carbohydrate concentration (Krapp et al., 1993), and reduced levels of photosynthetic raw materials such as RuBP and cytosolic Pi (Goldschmidt & Huber, 1992). We conclude that increased Amax was supported by an increase in Rubisco activity, as Vcmax increased at high night temperature and elevated p(CO2)a. This conclusion is supported by previous studies investigating temperature ×p(CO2)a effects (Warner et al., 1995).

The increase in Amax measured between the 15 and 25°C night temperatures (16 and 12% increase at 42 and 80 Pa, respectively) has the potential to significantly affect patterns of tree carbon gain in future climatic conditions (Easterling et al., 1997; Alward et al., 1999). We did find that the A : Rd ratio remained relatively constant at the three night temperature treatments (consistent with Gifford, 2003), but the increase in A must result in an increase in net photosynthate potentially available for growth (A − Rd increases). Although smaller in magnitude, the trend we observed here in response to nocturnal warming is consistent with our previous findings at ambient CO2 (Turnbull et al., 2002). The greater response in this 2002 study is likely to be a result of the differences in season, greater total sink capacity (trees were coppiced and 1 yr older so had larger root systems), and the addition of a daytime temperature increase (which increased Amax by 15% on top of the night warming treatment). The response of these trees to extremely elevated CO2 partial pressures is also noteworthy. At the leaf level there was a strong indication that the increase in photosynthetic capacity at higher night temperatures was much less pronounced at 120 Pa (only a 4% increase between 15 and 25°C). This may indicate a saturation of the photosynthetic response to increased night temperature at highly elevated p(CO2)a, although such high CO2 partial pressures are unlikely to occur this century (IPCC, 2001).

Having conducted two separate, but related, experiments over two different growing seasons (this experiment and those described by Turnbull et al., 2002), we are confident that the mechanism we propose regarding the impact of elevated nocturnal temperature on photosynthesis in this system is robust and repeatable. The large scale of this experiment did not allow for treatment replication and, although not strictly an independent study, the response to nocturnal warming has now been confirmed in newly coppiced growth in the same trees on a second occasion. We recognize that both experiments have been conducted over a short time scale (days). Assessment of the long-term implications of these findings for net carbon uptake in a global climate change environment must take account of long-term acclimatory responses to elevated night-time temperatures. In this experiment, trees were given a 48 h ‘acclimation’ period at each experimental temperature before making measurements. This was appropriate given the rapid acclimation of respiration to temperature (Atkin et al., 2000), and we found that this period was sufficient for leaves to return to their pre-experiment Amax when exposed to the middle (20°C) temperature treatment. However, we are mindful that further investigations are needed concerning impacts on larger-scale processes (e.g. growth) over longer time scales. Based on our present finding, that daytime photosynthetic capacity increases following warmer nights, we would predict that plant growth responses to elevated p(CO2)a may be enhanced at elevated night temperatures because of increased sink metabolism and depletion of assimilates (Gifford, 1992; Morison & Lawlor, 1999). However, the full significance of nocturnal warming can only be tested on the balance of night and day carbon exchange and, ultimately, plant growth rates (Myneni et al., 1997; Alward et al., 1999) in long-term studies.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The authors gratefully acknowledge the Packard Foundation (Grant DLP 998306 to K.L.G.) and the National Science Foundation (Grant IBN 9603940 to K.L.G.) for providing the principal financial support for this research. We also acknowledge the Columbia Earth Institute for a postdoctoral fellowship to X.W., and the University of Canterbury Erskine Fund for travel support to M.H.T. The excellent technical assistance of Ardis Thompson, Brent Wehner, Blake Farnsworth, Barbara Watson, Vic Engel, Christi Klimas, Greg Barron-Gafford and Lane Patterson is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Materials and Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
  • Alward RD, Detling JK, Milchunas DG. 1999. Grassland vegetation changes and nocturnal global warming. Science 283: 229231.
  • Amthor JS. 1997. Plant respiratory responses to elevated CO2 partial pressure. In: WhitmanCE, ed. Advances in Carbon Dioxide Effects Research, ASA Special Publication No. 61. Madison, WI, USA: ASA/CSSA/SSSA.
  • Amthor JS. 2000. Direct effect of elevated CO2 on nocturnal in situ leaf respiration in nine temperate deciduous tree species is small. Tree Physiology 20: 139144.
  • Atkin OK, Holly C, Ball MC. 2000. Acclimation of snow gum (Eucalyptus pauciflora) leaf respiration to seasonal and diurnal variations in temperature: the importance of changes in the capacity and temperature sensitivity of respiration. Plant, Cell & Environment 23: 1526.
  • Azcon-Bieto J. 1992. Relationships between photosynthesis and respiration in the dark in plants. In: MedranoH, ed. Trends in photosynthesis research. Andover, UK: Intercept, 241253.
  • Azcon-Bieto J. 1993. Inhibition of photosynthesis by carbohydrates in wheat leaves. Plant Physiology 73: 681686.
  • Azcon-Bieto J, Osmond BC. 1983. Relationship between photosynthesis and respiration. Plant Physiology 71: 574581.
  • Bolstad PV, Mitchell K, Vose JM. 1999. Foliar temperature-respiration response functions for broad-leaved tree species in the southern Appalachians. Tree Physiology 19: 871878.
  • Bruhn D, Leverenz JW, Saxe H. 2000. Effects of tree size and temperature on relative growth rate and its components of Fagus sylvatica seedlings exposed to two partial pressures of atmospheric CO2. New Phytologist 146: 415425.
  • Dempster WF. 1999. Biosphere 2 engineering design. Ecological Engineering 13: 3142.
  • Easterling DR, Horton B, Jones PD, Peterson TC, Karl TR, Parker DE, Salinger MJ, Razuvayev V, Plummer N, Jamason P, Folland CK. 1997. Maximum and minimum temperature trends for the globe. Science 277: 364367.
  • Gifford RM. 1992. Interaction of carbon dioxide with growth-limiting environmental factors in vegetation productivity: implications for the global carbon cycle. Advances in Bioclimatology 1: 2458.
  • Gifford RM. 2003. Plant respiration in productivity models: conceptualisation, representation and issues for global terrestrial carbon-cycle research. Functional Plant Biology 30: 171186.
  • Goldschmidt EE, Huber SC. 1992. Regulation of photosynthesis by end-product accumulation in leaves of plants storing starch, sucrose, and hexose sugars. Plant Physiology 99: 14431448.
  • Gonzalez-Meler MA, Siedow JN. 1999. Direct inhibition of mitochondrial respiratory enzymes by elevated CO2: does it matter at the tissue or whole-plant level? Tree Physiology 19: 253259.
  • Griffin KL, Turnbull MH, Murthy R. 2002a. Canopy position affects the temperature response of leaf respiration in Populus deltoides. New Phytologist 154: 609619.
  • Griffin KL, Turnbull MH, Murthy R, Lin G, Adams J, Farnsworth B, Mahato T, Bazin G, Potosnak M, Berry JA. 2002b. Leaf respiration is differentially affected by leaf vs. ecosystem night-time warming. Global Change Biology 8: 479485.
  • Gunderson CA, Norby RJ, Wullschleger SD. 2000. Acclimation of photosynthesis and respiration to simulated climatic warming in northern and southern populations of Acer saccharum: laboratory and field evidence. Tree Physiology 20: 8796.
  • Hamilton JG, Thomas RB, Delucia EH. 2001. Direct and indirect effects of elevated CO2 on leaf respiration in a forest ecosystem. Plant, Cell & Environment 24: 975982.
  • Harley PC, Sharkey TD. 1991. An improved model of C3 photosynthesis at high CO2– reversed O2 sensitivity explained by lack of glycerate reentry into the chloroplast. Photosynthesis Research 27: 169178.
  • IPCC. 2001. Third assessment report of working group I. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Environment Programme.
  • Körner C, Miglietta F. 1994. Long term effects of naturally elevated CO2 on mediterranean grassland and forest trees. Oecologia 99: 343351.
  • Krapp A, Stitt M. 1995. An evaluation of direct and indirect mechanisms for the sink-regulation of photosynthesis in spinach – changes in gas-exchange, carbohydrates, metabolites, enzyme-activities and steady-state transcript levels after cold-girdling source leaves. Planta 195: 313323.
  • Krapp A, Hofman B, Schafer C, Stitt M. 1993. Regulation of the expression of rbcS and other photosynthetic genes by carbohydrates: a mechanism for the ‘sink regulation’ of photosynthesis. Plant Journal 3: 817828.
  • Leverenz JW, Bruhn D, Saxe H. 1999. Responses of two provenances of Fagus sylvatica seedlings to a combination of four temperature and two CO2 treatments during their first growing season: gas exchange of leaves and roots. New Phytologist 144: 437454.
  • Lin GH, Marino BDV, Wei YD, Adams J, Tubiello F, Berry JA. 1998. An experimental and modeling study of responses in ecosystems carbon exchanges to increasing CO2 concentrations using a tropical rainforest mesocosm. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 25: 547556.
  • Long SP. 1991. Modification of the response of photosynthetic productivity to rising temperature by atmospheric CO2 concentrations: has its importance been understood? Plant, Cell & Environment 14: 729739.
  • McMurtrie RE, Wang YP. 1993. Mathematical models of the photosynthetic response of tree stands to rising CO2 concentrations and temperatures. Plant, Cell & Environment 16: 113.
  • Moore BD, Cheng SH, Sims D, Seemann JR. 1999. The biochemical and molecular basis for photosynthetic acclimation to elevated atmospheric CO2. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 567582.
  • Morison JIL, Lawlor DW. 1999. Interactions between increasing CO2 concentration and temperature on plant growth. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 659682.
  • Myneni RB, Keeling CD, Tucker CJ, Asrar G, Nemani RR. 1997. Increased plant growth in the northern high latitudes from 1981 to 1991. Nature 386: 698702.
  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. 1981. Biometry. New York, NY, USA: W.H. Freeman.
  • Stitt M, Quick WP. 1989. Photosynthetic carbon partitioning: its regulation and possibilities for manipulation. Physiologia Plantarum 77: 633641.
  • Stitt M, Schulze ED. 1994. Plant growth, storage, and resource allocation: from flux control in a metabolic chain to the whole-plant level. In: SchulzeED, ed. Flux control in biological systems. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press, 57118.
  • Stitt M, Huber S, Kerr P. 1987. Control of photosynthetic sucrose formation. In: BoardmanNK, ed. The biochemistry of plants, vol. 10: photosynthesis. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press, 327409.
  • Teskey RO. 1997. Combined effects of elevated CO2 and air temperature on carbon assimilation of Pinus taeda trees. Plant, Cell & Environment 20: 373380.
  • Tissue DT, Lewis JD, Wullschleger SD, Amthor JS, Griffin KL, Anderson R. 2002. Leaf respiration at different canopy positions in sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) grown in ambient and elevated concentrations of carbon dioxide in the field. Tree Physiology 22: 11571166.
  • Tjoelker MG, Oleksyn J, Reich PB. 2001. Modelling respiration of vegetation: evidence for a general temperature-dependent Q10. Global Change Biology 7: 223230.
  • Turnbull MH, Whitehead D, Tissue DT, Schuster W, Brown KJ, Griffin KL. 2001. The response of leaf respiration to temperature and leaf characteristics in three deciduous tree species differs at sites of contrasting soil moisture. Tree Physiology 21: 571578.
  • Turnbull MH, Murthy R, Griffin KL. 2002. The relative impacts of daytime and night-time warming on photosynthetic capacity in Populus deltoides. Plant, Cell & Environment 25: 17291737.
  • Underwood AJ. 1981. Techniques of analysis of variance in experimental marine biology and ecology. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Reviews 19: 513605.
  • Warner DA, Holaday AS, Burke JJ. 1995. Response of carbon metabolism to night temperature in cotton. Agronomy Journal 87: 11931197.
  • Wurth MKR, Winter K, Korner C. 1998. Leaf carbohydrate responses to CO2 enrichment at the top of a tropical forest. Oecologia 116: 1825.
  • Zabel B, Hawes P, Stuart H, Marino BDV. 1999. Construction and engineering of a created environment: overview of the Biosphere 2 closed system. Ecological Engineering 13: 4363.
  • Ziska LH, Bunce JA. 1997. The role of temperature in determining the stimulation of CO2 assimilation at elevated carbon dioxide concentration in soybean seedlings. Physiologia Plantarum 100: 126132.