 |
| Titel |
The leaf-level emission factor of volatile isoprenoids: caveats, model algorithms, response shapes and scaling |
| VerfasserIn |
Ü. Niinemets, R. K. Monson, A. Arneth, P. Ciccioli, J. Kesselmeier, U. Kuhn, S. M. Noe, J. Peñuelas, M. Staudt |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1726-4170
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Biogeosciences ; 7, no. 6 ; Nr. 7, no. 6 (2010-06-01), S.1809-1832 |
| Datensatznummer |
250004840
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/bg-7-1809-2010.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| In models of plant volatile isoprenoid emissions, the instantaneous compound
emission rate typically scales with the plant's emission potential under
specified environmental conditions, also called as the emission factor,
ES. In the most widely employed plant isoprenoid emission models, the
algorithms developed by Guenther and colleagues (1991, 1993), instantaneous
variation of the steady-state emission rate is described as the product of
ES and light and temperature response functions. When these models are
employed in the atmospheric chemistry modeling community, species-specific
ES values and parameter values defining the instantaneous response
curves are often taken as initially defined. In the current review, we argue
that ES as a characteristic used in the models importantly depends on
our understanding of which environmental factors affect isoprenoid
emissions, and consequently need standardization during experimental
ES determinations. In particular, there is now increasing consensus that
in addition to variations in light and temperature, alterations in
atmospheric and/or within-leaf CO2 concentrations may need to be
included in the emission models. Furthermore, we demonstrate that for less
volatile isoprenoids, mono- and sesquiterpenes, the emissions are often
jointly controlled by the compound synthesis and volatility. Because of
these combined biochemical and physico-chemical drivers, specification of
ES as a constant value is incapable of describing instantaneous
emissions within the sole assumptions of fluctuating light and temperature
as used in the standard algorithms. The definition of ES also varies
depending on the degree of aggregation of ES values in different
parameterization schemes (leaf- vs. canopy- or region-scale, species vs.
plant functional type levels) and various aggregated ES schemes are not
compatible for different integration models. The summarized information
collectively emphasizes the need to update model algorithms by including
missing environmental and physico-chemical controls, and always to define
ES within the proper context of model structure and spatial and temporal
resolution. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|