Research

Phenology of Photosynthesis in Winter‐Dormant Temperate and Boreal Forests: Long‐Term Observations From Flux Towers and Quantitative Evaluation of Phenology Models

DOE

Source: doe_osti

Questions this answers

Sources

Source record

The underlying research record — supporting evidence for the object above.

Key Details

Posted Date
Source
doe_osti

Description

Abstract <p>We examined the seasonality of photosynthesis in 46 evergreen needleleaf (evergreen needleleaf forests (ENF)) and deciduous broadleaf (deciduous broadleaf forests (DBF)) forests across North America and Eurasia. We quantified the onset and end (Start<sub>GPP</sub>and End<sub>GPP</sub>) of photosynthesis in spring and autumn based on the response of net ecosystem exchange of CO<sub>2</sub>to sunlight. To test the hypothesis that snowmelt is required for photosynthesis to begin, these were compared with end of snowmelt derived from soil temperature. ENF forests achieved 10% of summer photosynthetic capacity ∼3&nbsp;weeks before end of snowmelt, while DBF forests achieved that capacity ∼4&nbsp;weeks afterward. DBF forests increased photosynthetic capacity in spring faster (1.95% d<sup>−1</sup>) than ENF (1.10% d<sup>−1</sup>), and their active season length (End<sub>GPP</sub>–Start<sub>GPP</sub>) was ∼50&nbsp;days shorter. We hypothesized that warming has influenced timing of the photosynthesis season. We found minimal evidence for long‐term change in Start<sub>GPP</sub>, End<sub>GPP</sub>, or air temperature, but their interannual anomalies were significantly correlated. Warmer weather was associated with earlier Start<sub>GPP</sub>(1.3–2.5&nbsp;days&nbsp;°C<sup>−1</sup>) or later End<sub>GPP</sub>(1.5–1.8&nbsp;days&nbsp;°C<sup>−1</sup>, depending on forest type and month). Finally, we tested whether existing phenological models could predict Start<sub>GPP</sub>and End<sub>GPP</sub>. For ENF forests, air temperature‐ and daylength‐based models provided best predictions for Start<sub>GPP</sub>, while a chilling‐degree‐day model was best for End<sub>GPP</sub>. The root mean square errors (RMSE) between predicted and observed Start<sub>GPP</sub>and End<sub>GPP</sub>were 11.7 and 11.3&nbsp;days, respectively. For DBF forests, temperature‐ and daylength‐based models yielded the best results (RMSE 6.3 and 10.5&nbsp;days).</p>. Authors: Bowling, David (ORCID:0000000238644042); Schädel, Christina; Smith, Kenneth (ORCID:0000000319663042); Richardson, Andrew (ORCID:0000000201486714); Bahn, Michael. DOE Contract: AC02-05CH11231. Subjects: Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology; Geology

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this record?+
It is a publication associated with DOE — published findings, a technical standard, or a notice. It reports results or specifications. There is nothing here to apply for.

Where this record sits

What else do you want to know?

100M+ government records — search across all categories