Articles | Volume 17, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-265-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-265-2020
Research article
 | 
20 Jan 2020
Research article |  | 20 Jan 2020

Low sensitivity of gross primary production to elevated CO2 in a mature eucalypt woodland

Jinyan Yang, Belinda E. Medlyn, Martin G. De Kauwe, Remko A. Duursma, Mingkai Jiang, Dushan Kumarathunge, Kristine Y. Crous, Teresa E. Gimeno, Agnieszka Wujeska-Klause, and David S. Ellsworth

Related authors

Evaluating a land surface model at a water-limited site: implications for land surface contributions to droughts and heatwaves
Mengyuan Mu, Martin G. De Kauwe, Anna M. Ukkola, Andy J. Pitman, Teresa E. Gimeno, Belinda E. Medlyn, Dani Or, Jinyan Yang, and David S. Ellsworth
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 447–471, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-447-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-447-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeochemistry: Modelling, Terrestrial
Representation of the terrestrial carbon cycle in CMIP6
Bettina K. Gier, Manuel Schlund, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Sönke Zaehle, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 21, 5321–5360, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024, 2024
Short summary
Does dynamically modeled leaf area improve predictions of land surface water and carbon fluxes? Insights into dynamic vegetation modules
Sven Armin Westermann, Anke Hildebrandt, Souhail Bousetta, and Stephan Thober
Biogeosciences, 21, 5277–5303, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, 2024
Short summary
Observational benchmarks inform representation of soil organic carbon dynamics in land surface models
Kamal Nyaupane, Umakant Mishra, Feng Tao, Kyongmin Yeo, William J. Riley, Forrest M. Hoffman, and Sagar Gautam
Biogeosciences, 21, 5173–5183, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024, 2024
Short summary
X-BASE: the first terrestrial carbon and water flux products from an extended data-driven scaling framework, FLUXCOM-X
Jacob A. Nelson, Sophia Walther, Fabian Gans, Basil Kraft, Ulrich Weber, Kimberly Novick, Nina Buchmann, Mirco Migliavacca, Georg Wohlfahrt, Ladislav Šigut, Andreas Ibrom, Dario Papale, Mathias Göckede, Gregory Duveiller, Alexander Knohl, Lukas Hörtnagl, Russell L. Scott, Weijie Zhang, Zayd Mahmoud Hamdi, Markus Reichstein, Sergio Aranda-Barranco, Jonas Ardö, Maarten Op de Beeck, Dave Billesbach, David Bowling, Rosvel Bracho, Christian Brümmer, Gustau Camps-Valls, Shiping Chen, Jamie Rose Cleverly, Ankur Desai, Gang Dong, Tarek S. El-Madany, Eugenie Susanne Euskirchen, Iris Feigenwinter, Marta Galvagno, Giacomo A. Gerosa, Bert Gielen, Ignacio Goded, Sarah Goslee, Christopher Michael Gough, Bernard Heinesch, Kazuhito Ichii, Marcin Antoni Jackowicz-Korczynski, Anne Klosterhalfen, Sara Knox, Hideki Kobayashi, Kukka-Maaria Kohonen, Mika Korkiakoski, Ivan Mammarella, Mana Gharun, Riccardo Marzuoli, Roser Matamala, Stefan Metzger, Leonardo Montagnani, Giacomo Nicolini, Thomas O'Halloran, Jean-Marc Ourcival, Matthias Peichl, Elise Pendall, Borja Ruiz Reverter, Marilyn Roland, Simone Sabbatini, Torsten Sachs, Marius Schmidt, Christopher R. Schwalm, Ankit Shekhar, Richard Silberstein, Maria Lucia Silveira, Donatella Spano, Torbern Tagesson, Gianluca Tramontana, Carlo Trotta, Fabio Turco, Timo Vesala, Caroline Vincke, Domenico Vitale, Enrique R. Vivoni, Yi Wang, William Woodgate, Enrico A. Yepez, Junhui Zhang, Donatella Zona, and Martin Jung
Biogeosciences, 21, 5079–5115, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5079-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5079-2024, 2024
Short summary
A 2001–2022 global gross primary productivity dataset using an ensemble model based on the random forest method
Xin Chen, Tiexi Chen, Xiaodong Li, Yuanfang Chai, Shengjie Zhou, Renjie Guo, and Jie Dai
Biogeosciences, 21, 4285–4300, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4285-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4285-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Ainsworth, E. A. and Long, S. P.: What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2, New Phytol., 165, 351–372, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01224.x, 2005. 
Bonan, G. B.: Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Fiorests, Science, 320, 1444–1449, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121, 2008. 
Bonan, G. B., Lawrence, P. J., Oleson, K. W., Levis, S., Jung, M., Reichstein, M., Lawrence, D. M., and Swenson, S. C.: Improving canopy processes in the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) using global flux fields empirically inferred from FLUXNET data, J. Geophys. Res., 116, 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jg001593, 2011. 
Chen, J. L., Reynolds, J. F., Harley, P. C., and Tenhunen, J. D.: Coordination theory of leaf nitrogen distribution in a canopy, Oecologia, 93, 63–69, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00321192, 1993. 
Clark, D. B., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Jones, C. D., Gedney, N., Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Harding, R. J., Huntingford, C., and Cox, P. M.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-701-2011, 2011. 
Download
Short summary
This study addressed a major knowledge gap in the response of forest productivity to elevated CO2. We first quantified forest productivity of an evergreen forest under both ambient and elevated CO2, using a model constrained by in situ measurements. The simulation showed the canopy productivity response to elevated CO2 to be smaller than that at the leaf scale due to different limiting processes. This finding provides a key reference for the understanding of CO2 impacts on forest ecosystems.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint