Paper · 2000 · Global Change Biology

Water use of two Mojave Desert shrubs under elevated CO2

D. E. Pataki; T. E. Huxman; D. N. Jordan; et al.

6
claims
6
verbatim quotes
44
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Summary Plant responses to elevated atmospheric CO 2 have been characterized generally by stomatal closure and enhanced growth rates. These responses are being increasingly incorporated into global climate models that quantify interactions between the biosphere and atmosphere, altering climate predictions from simpler physically based models. However, current information on CO 2 responses has been gathered primarily from studies of crop and temperate forest species. In order to apply responses of vegetation to global predictions, CO 2 responses in other commonly occurring biomes must be studied. A Free Air CO 2 Enrichment (FACE) study is currently underway to examine plant responses to high CO 2 in a natural, undisturbed Mojave Desert ecosystem in Nevada, USA. Here we present findings from this study, and its companion glasshouse experiment, demonstrating that field‐grown Ephedra nevadensis and glasshouse‐grown Larrea tridentata responded to high CO 2 with reductions in the ratio of transpirational surface area to sapwood area (LSR) of 33% and 60%, respectively. Thus, leaf‐specific hydraulic conductivity increased and stomatal conductance remained constant or was increased under elevated CO 2 . Field‐grown Larrea did not show a reduced LSR under high CO 2 , and stomatal conductance was reduced in the high CO 2 treatment, although the effect was apparent only under conditions of unusually high soil moisture. Both findings suggest that the common paradigm of 20–50% reductions in stomatal conductance under high CO 2 may not be applicable to arid ecosystems under most conditions.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 reduced leaf to sapwood area ratio by 33% in field grown Ephedra nevadensis.

Taxon
Ephedra nevadensisEphedra nevadensise0
Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
ratio of transpirational surface area to sapwood area (LSR)e0
Direction
reductionse0
Value
33%e0
Setting
field‐growne0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ephedra nevadensis
Ephedra nevadensis · TaxonJoe Decruyenaere · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“field‐grown Ephedra nevadensis and glasshouse‐grown Larrea tridentata responded to high CO 2 with reductions in the ratio of transpirational surface area to sapwood area (LSR) of 33% and 60%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1077 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 reduced leaf to sapwood area ratio by 60% in glasshouse grown Larrea tridentata.

Taxon
Larrea tridentataLarrea tridentatae0
Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
ratio of transpirational surface area to sapwood area (LSR)e0
Direction
reductionse0
Value
60%e0
Setting
glasshouse‐growne0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Larrea tridentata
Larrea tridentata · TaxonEric in SF · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“field‐grown Ephedra nevadensis and glasshouse‐grown Larrea tridentata responded to high CO 2 with reductions in the ratio of transpirational surface area to sapwood area (LSR) of 33% and 60%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1077 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf specific hydraulic conductivity increased under elevated CO2.

Treatment
elevated CO 2e0
Outcome
leaf‐specific hydraulic conductivitye0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“leaf‐specific hydraulic conductivity increased and stomatal conductance remained constant or was increased under elevated CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1085–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stomatal conductance stayed constant or increased under elevated CO2 in the responsive shrubs.

Treatment
elevated CO 2e0
Outcome
stomatal conductancee0
Direction
remained constant or was increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“stomatal conductance remained constant or was increased under elevated CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1136–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field grown Larrea did not show reduced leaf to sapwood area ratio under high CO2.

Taxon
LarreaLarreae0
Treatment
high CO 2e0
Outcome
LSRe0
Direction
did not show a reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Larrea
Larrea · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryNeepv0712 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Field‐grown Larrea did not show a reduced LSR under high CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1214–1275 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High CO2 reduced stomatal conductance in field grown Larrea only with unusually high soil moisture.

Treatment
high CO 2 treatmente0
Outcome
stomatal conductancee0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
unusually high soil moisturee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“stomatal conductance was reduced in the high CO 2 treatment, although the effect was apparent only under conditions of unusually high soil moisture”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1282–1429 · show in text ↑