Contents

 Summary 1

I. What is FACE? 2
II. Materials and methods 2
III. Photosynthetic carbon uptake 3
IV. Acclimation of photosynthesis 6
V. Growth, above-ground production and yield 8
VI. So, what have we learned? 10

 Acknowledgements 11


 References 11


Appendix 1. References included in the database for meta-analyses  14


 Appendix 2. Results of the meta-analysis of FACE effects 18



Summary
Free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE) experiments allow study of the effects of elevated [CO2] on plants and ecosystems grown under natural conditions without enclosure. Data from 120 primary, peer-reviewed articles describing physiology and production in the 12 large-scale FACE experiments (475–600 ppm) were collected and summarized using meta-analytic techniques. The results confirm some results from previous chamber experiments: light-saturated carbon uptake, diurnal C assimilation, growth and above-ground production increased, while specific leaf area and stomatal conductance decreased in elevated [CO2]. There were differences in FACE. Trees were more responsive than herbaceous species to elevated [CO2]. Grain crop yields increased far less than anticipated from prior enclosure studies. The broad direction of change in photosynthesis and production in elevated [CO2] may be similar in FACE and enclosure studies, but there are major quantitative differences: trees were more responsive than other functional types; C4 species showed little response; and the reduction in plant nitrogen was small and largely accounted for by decreased Rubisco. The results from this review may provide the most plausible estimates of how plants in their native environments and field-grown crops will respond to rising atmospheric [CO2]; but even with FACE there are limitations, which are also discussed.

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.

Plants are finely tuned to the seasonality of their environment, and shifts in the timing of plant activity (i.e. phenology) provide some of the most compelling evidence that species and ecosystems are being influenced by global environmental change. Researchers across disciplines have observed shifting phenology at multiple scales, including earlier spring flowering in individual plants and an earlier spring green-up' of the land surface revealed in satellite images. Experimental and modeling approaches have sought to identify the mechanisms causing these shifts, as well as to make predictions regarding the consequences. Here, we discuss recent advances in several fields that have enabled scaling between species responses to recent climatic changes and shifts in ecosystem productivity, with implications for global carbon cycling.

https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/pdf/S0169-5347(07)00130-9.pdf

Shifting plant phenology in response to global change

This paper analyses the global consequences to crop yields, production, and risk of hunger of linked socio-economic and climate scenarios. Potential impacts of climate change are estimated for climate change scenarios developed from the HadCM3 global climate model under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A1FI, A2, B1, and B2. Projected changes in yield are calculated using transfer functions derived from crop model simulations with observed climate data and projected climate change scenarios. The basic linked system (BLS) is used to evaluate consequent changes in global cereal production, cereal prices and the number of people at risk from hunger. The crop yield results elucidate the complex regional patterns of projected climate variables, CO 2 effects, and agricultural systems that contribute to aggregations of global crop production. The A1FI scenario, as expected with its large increase in global temperatures, exhibits the greatest decreases both regionally and globally in yields, especially by the 2080s. The contrast between the yield change in developed and developing countries is largest under the A2a–c scenarios. Under the B1 and B2 scenarios, developed and developing countries exhibit less contrast in crop yield changes, with the B2 future crop yield changes being slightly more favourable than those of the B1 scenario. When crop yield results are introduced to the BLS world food trade system model, the combined model and scenario experiments demonstrate that the world, for the most part, appears to be able to continue to feed itself under the SRES scenarios during the rest of this century. However, this outcome is achieved through production in the developed countries (which mostly benefit from climate change) compensating for declines projected, for the most part, for developing nations. While global production appears stable, regional differences in crop production are likely to grow stronger through time, leading to a significant polarisation of effects, with substantial increases in prices and risk of hunger amongst the poorer nations, especially under scenarios of greater inequality (A1FI and A2). The use of the SRES scenarios highlights several non-linearities in the world food supply system, both in the biophysical sense, where the levels of atmospheric CO 2 tested reach new levels, and the socio-economic sense, where changes in population dynamics and economic and political structures complicate the translation of biophysical climate change impacts into social indices, such as the number of people at risk of hunger.

/pdf/effects-of-climate-change-on-global-food-production-under-1ppvjbb9ba.pdf

Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios

The yield potential ( Y p ) of a grain crop is the seed mass per unit ground area obtained under optimum growing conditions without weeds, pests and diseases. It is determined by the product of the available light energy and by the genetically determined properties: efficiency of light capture ( e i ), the efficiency of conversion of the intercepted light into biomass ( e c ) and the proportion of biomass partitioned into grain ( h ). Plant breeding brings h and e i close to their theoretical maxima, leaving e c , primarily determined by photosynthesis, as the only remaining major prospect for improving Y p . Leaf photosynthetic rate, however, is poorly correlated with yield when different genotypes of a crop species are compared. This led to the viewpoint that improvement of leaf photosynthesis has little value for improving Y p . By contrast, the many recent experiments that compare the growth of a genotype in current and future projected elevated [CO 2 ] environments show that increase in leaf photosynthesis is closely associated with similar increases in yield. Are there opportunities to achieve similar increases by genetic manipulation? Six potential routes of increasing e c by improving photosynthetic efficiency were explored, ranging from altered canopy architecture to improved regeneration of the acceptor molecule for CO 2 . Collectively, these changes could improve e c and, therefore, Y p by c . 50%. Because some changes could be achieved by transgenic technology, the time of the development of commercial cultivars could be considerably less than by conventional breeding and potentially, within 10‐15 years.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01493.x

Can improvement in photosynthesis increase crop yields

Changes in temperature, CO 2 , and precipitation under the scenarios of climate change for the next 30 yr present a challenge to crop production. This review focuses on the impact of temperature, CO 2 , and ozone on agronomic crops and the implications for crop production. Understanding these implications for agricultural crops is critical for developing cropping systems resilient to stresses induced by climate change. There is variation among crops in their response to CO 2 , temperature, and precipitation changes and, with the regional differences in predicted climate, a situation is created in which the responses will be further complicated. For example, the temperature effects on soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] could potentially cause yield reductions of 2.4% in the South but an increase of 1.7% in the Midwest. The frequency of years when temperatures exceed thresholds for damage during critical growth stages is likely to increase for some crops and regions. The increase in CO 2 contributes significantly to enhanced plant growth and improved water use efficiency (WUE); however, there may be a downscaling of these positive impacts due to higher temperatures plants will experience during their growth cycle. A challenge is to understand the interactions of the changing climatic parameters because of the interactions among temperature, CO 2 , and precipitation on plant growth and development and also on the biotic stresses of weeds, insects, and diseases. Agronomists will have to consider the variations in temperature and precipitation as part of the production system if they are to ensure the food security required by an ever increasing population.

/pdf/climate-impacts-on-agriculture-implications-for-crop-3860st31ti.pdf

Climate Impacts on Agriculture: Implications for Crop Production

Over the past decade, free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE) experiments have been conducted on several agricultural crops: wheat(Triticum aestivum L.), perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), and rice(Oryza sativa L.) which are C3 grasses; sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench), a C4 grass; white clover (Trifolium repens), a C3 legume; potato (Solanum tuberosum L.), a C3 forb with tuber storage; and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and grape (Vitis vinifera L.) which are C3 woody perennials. Using reports from these experiments, the relative responses of these crops was discussed with regard to photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, canopy temperature, water use, water potential, leaf area index, shoot and root biomass accumulation, agricultural yield, radiation use efficiency, specific leaf area, tissue nitrogen concentration, nitrogen yield, carbohydrate concentration, phenology, soil microbiology, soil respiration, trace gas emissions, and soil carbon sequestration. Generally, the magnitude of these responses varied with the functional type of plant and with the soil nitrogen and water status. As expected, the elevated CO2 increased photosynthesis and biomass production and yield substantially in C3 species, but little in C4, and it decreased stomatal conductance and transpiration in both C3 and C4 species and greatly improved water-use efficiency in all the crops. Growth stimulations were as large or larger under water-stress compared to well-watered conditions. Growth stimulations of non-legumes were reduced at low soil nitrogen, whereas elevated CO2 strongly stimulated the growth of the clover legume both at ample and under low N conditions. Roots were generally stimulated more than shoots. Woody perennials had larger growth responses to elevated CO2, while at the same time, their reductions in stomatal conductance were smaller. Tissue nitrogen concentrations went down while carbohydrate and some other carbon-based compounds went up due to elevated CO2, with leaves and foliage affected more than other organs. Phenology was accelerated slightly in most but not all species. Elevated CO2 affected some soil microbes greatly but not others, yet overall activity appears to be stimulated. Detection of statistically significant changes in soil organic carbon in any one study was impossible, yet combining results from several sites and years, it appears that elevated CO2 did increase sequestration of soil carbon. Whenever possible, comparisons were made between the FACE results and those from prior chamber-based experiments reviewed in the literature. Over all the data and parameters considered in this review, there are only two parameters for which the FACE- and chamber-based data appear to be inconsistent. One is that elevated CO2 from FACE appears to reduce stomatal conductance about one and a half times more than observed in prior chamber experiments. Similarly, elevated CO2 appears to have stimulated root growth relatively more than shoot growth under FACE conditions compared to chamber conditions. Nevertheless, for the most part, the FACE- and chamber-based results have been consistent, which gives confidence that conclusions drawn from both types of data are accurate. However, the more realistic FACE environment and the larger plot size have enabled more extensive robust multidisciplinary data sets to be obtained under conditions representative of open fields in the future high-CO2 world.

K Kobayashi

Papers

[Responses of agricultural crops of free-air CO2 enrichment].