Advertisement

Polar Biology

, Volume 39, Issue 9, pp 1581–1596 | Cite as

The interaction of biotic and abiotic factors at multiple spatial scales affects the variability of CO2 fluxes in polar environments

  • N. CannoneEmail author
  • A. Augusti
  • F. Malfasi
  • E. Pallozzi
  • C. Calfapietra
  • E. Brugnoli
Original Paper

Abstract

Climate change may turn Arctic biomes from carbon sinks into sources and vice versa, depending on the balance between gross ecosystem photosynthesis, ecosystem respiration (ER) and the resulting net ecosystem exchange (NEE). Photosynthetic capacity is species specific, and thus, it is important to quantify the contribution of different target plant species to NEE and ER. At Ny Ålesund (Svalbard archipelago, Norway), we selected different Arctic tundra plant species and measured CO2 fluxes at plot scale and photosynthetic capacity at leaf scale. We aimed to analyze trends in CO2 fluxes during the transition seasons (beginning vs. end of the growing season) and assess which abiotic (soil temperature, soil moisture, PAR) and biotic (plot type, phenology, LAI, photosynthetic capacity) factors influenced CO2 emissions. NEE and ER differed between vegetation communities. All communities acted as CO2 sources, with higher source strength at the beginning than at the end of the growing season. The key factors affecting NEE were soil temperature, LAI and species-specific photosynthetic capacities, coupled with phenology. ER was always influenced by soil temperature. Measurements of photosynthetic capacity indicated different responses among species to light intensity, as well as suggesting possible gains in response to future increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Species-specific adaptation to low temperatures could trigger significant feedbacks in a climate change context. Our data highlight the need to quantify the role of dominant species in the C cycle (sinks or sources), as changes of vegetation composition or species phenology in response to climate change may have great impact on the regional CO2 balance.

Keywords

Arctic ecosystems CO2 fluxes Species-specific photosynthetic capacity Soil temperature Carbon isotope composition Climate warming 

Abbreviations

Amax

Light-saturated photosynthesis rate

δ13C

Carbon isotope composition

Δ

Carbon isotope discrimination

CTT

Climate change tower

ER

Ecosystem respiration

GEP

Gross primary photosynthesis

NEE

Net ecosystem exchange

Vc,max

Maximum rate of Rubisco carboxylase activity

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the Department of Earth System Science and Environmental Technologies of the National Council of Research (CNR) for funding the field activities carried out in 2012 and 2013, the research station “Dirigibile Italia” and KingsBay, Vito Vitale and Roberto Sparapani for logistic support, Emiliano Liberatori and Laura Caiazzo for local support. Mauro Guglielmin, Luigi Mazari Villanova, Roberto Gambillara for their help in the field. Luciano Spaccino for carbon isotope analysis. We thank Prof. Peter Convey for assistance in the English revision of the manuscript.

Supplementary material

300_2015_1883_MOESM1_ESM.docx (781 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 780 kb)
300_2015_1883_MOESM2_ESM.docx (81 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 81 kb)
300_2015_1883_MOESM3_ESM.docx (82 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 82 kb)

References

  1. André M (1993) Les versants du Spitsberg. Presses Universitaires de Nancy, NancyGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndal MF, Illeris L, Michelsen A, Albert K, Tamstorf M, HansenSource BU (2009) Seasonal variation in gross ecosystem production, plant biomass, and carbon and nitrogen pools in five high arctic vegetation types. Arct Antarct Alp Res 41:164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asner JP, Scurlock JMO, Hicke JA (2003) Global synthesis of leaf area index observations: implications for ecological and remote sensing studies. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12:191–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barclay HJ (1998) Conversion of total leaf area to projected leaf area in lodgepole pine and Douglas-fir. Tree Physiol 18:185–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartak M, Vaczi P, Hajek J (2012) Photosynthetic activity in three vascular species of Spitsbergen vegetation during summer season in response to microclimate. Pol Polor Res 33:443–462Google Scholar
  6. Bender MM (1971) Variations in the 13C/12C ratios of plants in relation to the pathway of photosynthetic carbon dioxide fixation. Phytochemistry 10:1239–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernacchi CJ, Pimentel C, Long SP (2003) In vivo temperature response functions of parameters required to model RuBP-limited photosynthesis. Plant, Cell Environ 26:1419–1430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Billing WD (1987) Constraints to plant growth, reproduction, and establishment in arctic environments. Arct Alp Res 19:357–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Björkman MP, Morgner E, Björk RG, Cooper EJ, Elberling B, Klemedtsson L (2010) A comparison of annual and seasonal carbon dioxide effluxes between sub-arctic Sweden and high-arctic Svalbard. Polar Res 29:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bliss LC, Svoboda J (1984) Plant communities and plant production in the western Queen Elizabeth Islands. Holarct Ecol 7:325–344Google Scholar
  11. Boike J, Ippisch O, Overduin PP, Hagedorn B, Roth K (2008) Water, heat and solute dynamics of a mud boil, Spitsbergen. Geomorphology 95:61–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brüggemann N, Gessler A, Kayler Z et al (2011) Carbon allocation and carbon isotope fluxes in the plant-soil-atmosphere continuum: a review. Biogeosciences 8:3457–3489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brugnoli E, Farquhar GD (2000) Photosynthetic Fractionation of Carbon Isotopes. In: Leegood RC, Sharkey TD, von Caemmerer S (eds) Advances in photosynthesis vol 9: photosynthesis: physiology and metabolism. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Brugnoli E, Scartazza A, Lauteri M, Monteverdi MC, Máguas C (1998) Carbon isotope discrimination in structural and non-structural carbohydrates in relation to productivity and adaptation to unfavourable conditions. Stable Isotopes. In: Griffiths H (ed) Integration of biological, ecological and geochemical processes. BIOS Scientific Publishers, Oxford, pp 133–144Google Scholar
  15. Bunce JA (2008) Acclimation of photosynthesis to temperature in Arabidopsis thaliana and Brassica oleracea. Photosynth 46:517–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cannone N, Guglielmin M, Gerdol R (2004) Relationships between vegetation patterns and periglacial landforms in north-western Svalbard. Polor Biol 27:562–571Google Scholar
  17. Cernusak LA, Ubierna N, Winter K, Holtum JAM, Marshall JD, Farquhar GD (2013) Environmental and physiological determinants of carbon isotope discrimination in terrestrial plants. New Phytol 200:950–965CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Chapin FS, Woodwell GM, Randerson JT et al (2006) Reconciling carbon—cycle concepts, terminology, and methods. Ecosystem 9:1041–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Christiansen CT, Schmidt NM, Michelsen A (2012) High arctic dry heath CO2 exchange during the early cold season. Ecosystem 15:1083–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elberling B (2007) Annual soil CO2 effluxes in the high arctic: the role of snow thickness and vegetation type. Soil Biol Biochem 39:646–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elvebakk A (1994) A survey of plant associations and alliances from Svalbard. J Veg Sci 5:791–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Euskirchen ES, Bret-Harte MS, Scott GJ, Edgar C, Shaver GR (2012) Seasonal patterns of carbon dioxide and water fluxes in three representative tundra ecosystems in northern Alaska. Ecosphere 3:4. doi: 10.1890/ES11-00202.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fan Y, Zhong Z, Zhang X (2011) Determination of photosynthetic parameters V c,max and J max for a C3 plant (spring hulless barley) at two altitudes on the Tibetan Plateau. Agric For Meteorol 151:1481–1487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Farquhar GD, von Caemmerer S, Berry JA (1980) A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149:78–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Farquhar GD, O’Leary MH, Berry JA (1982) On the relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and the inter-cellular carbon-dioxide concentration in leaves. Aust J Plant Physiol 9:121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Farquhar GD, Ehleringer JR, Hubic KT (1989) Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 40:503–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Groendahl L, Friborg T, Soegaard H (2007) Temperature and snow-melt controls on interannual variability in carbon exchange in the high arctic. Theor Appl Clim 88:111–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heimann M, Reichstein M (2008) Terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics and climate feedbacks. Nature 451:289–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Stocker TF et al (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Kirschbaum MUF (2004) Soil respiration under prolonged soil warming: are rate reductions caused by acclimation or substrate loss? Glob Chang Biol 10:1870–1877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Körner C (2006) Plant CO2 responses: an issue of definition, time and resource supply. New Phytol 172:393–411CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kositsup B, Montpied P, Kasemsap P, Thaler P, Amélio T, Dreyer E (2009) Photosynthetic capacity and temperature responses of photosynthesis of rubber trees (Hevea brasiliensis Müll. Arg.) acclimate to changes in ambient temperatures. Trees Struct Funct 23:357–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koven CD, Ringeval B, Friedlingstein P et al (2011) Permafrost carbon-climate feedbacks accelerate global warming. PNAS 108:14769–14774CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Lafleur PM, Humphreys ER (2008) Spring warming and carbon dioxide exchange over low Arctic tundra. Glob Chang Biol 14:740–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lafleur PM, Humphreys ER, St. Louis VL et al (2012) Variation in peak growing season net ecosystem production across the Canadian arctic. Environ Sci Technol 46:7971–7977CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Lloyd CR (2001) The measurement and modeling of the carbon dioxide exchange at a high arctic site in Svalbard. Glob Chang Biol 7:405–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Long SP, Bernacchi CJ (2003) Gas exchange measurements, what can they tell us about the underlying limitations to photosynthesis? Procedures and sources of error. J Exp Bot 54(392):2393–2401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Lüers J, Westermann S, Piel K, Boike J (2014) Annual CO2 budget and seasonal CO2 exchange signals at a high arctic permafrost site on Spitsbergen, Svalbard archipelago. Biogeosciences 11:6307–6322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lund M et al (2010) Variability in exchange of CO2 across 12 northern peatland and tundra sites. Glob Chang Biol 16:2436–2448Google Scholar
  40. Marushchak ME, Kiepe I, Biasi C et al (2013) Carbon dioxide balance of subarctic tundra from plot to regional scales. Biogeosciences 10:437–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McFadden JP, Eugster W, Chapin FS (2003) A regional study of the controls on water vapor and CO2 exchange in Arctic tundra. Ecology 84:2762–2776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McGuire AD, Anderson LG, Christensen TR et al (2009) Sensitivity of the carbon cycle in the Arctic to climate change. Ecol Monogr 79:523–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McGuire AD, Christensen TR, Hayes D et al (2012) An assessment of the carbon balance of Arctic tundra: comparisons among observations, process models, and atmospheric inversions. Biogeosciences 9:3185–3204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Molau U, Molgaard P (eds) (1996) ITEX manual. Danish Polar Center, Denmark. ISBN 87-90369-04-1Google Scholar
  45. Morgner E, Elberling B, Strebel D, Cooper EJ (2010) The importance of winter in annual ecosystem respiration in the high arctic: effects of snow depth in two vegetation types. Polar Res 29:58–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Muraoka H, Noda H, Uchida M, Ohtsuka T, Koizumi H, Nakatsubo T (2008) Photosynthetic characteristics and biomass distribution of the dominant vascular plant species in a high arctic tundra ecosystem, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard: implications for their role in ecosystem carbon gain. J Plant Res 121:137–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Nakatsubo T, Fujiyoshi M, Yoshitake S, Koizumi H, Uchida M (2010) Colonization of the polar willow Salix polaris on the early stage of succession after glacier retreat in the high arctic, Ny-Alesund, Svalbard. Polar Res 29:385–390. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-8369.2010.00170.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Bigham JM et al (eds) Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy. Methods of soil analysis. Part 3: chemical methods-SSSA. Book series no. 5. Madison, WI, Chapter 34, pp 1001–1006Google Scholar
  49. Norby RJ, Luo Y (2004) Evaluating ecosystem responses to rising atmospheric CO2 and global warming in a multi-factor world. New Phytol 162:281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nowak RS, Ellsworth DS, Smith SD (2004) Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2–do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? New Phytol 162:253–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. O’Leary MH (1981) Carbon isotope fractionation in plants. Phytochemistry 27:553–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oberbauer SF, Tweedie CE, Welker JM et al (2007) Tundra CO2 fluxes in response to experimental warming across latitudinal and moisture gradients. Ecol Monogr 77:221–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Possell M, Hewitt CN (2009) Gas exchange and photosynthetic performance of the tropical tree Acacia nigrescens when grown in different CO2 concentrations. Planta 229:837–846CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Ronning OI (1986) The flora of Svalbard. Norsk Polar Institutt, OsloGoogle Scholar
  55. Schmidt H-L, Robins RJ, Werner RA (2015) Multi factorial in vivo stable isotope fractionation: causes, correlations, consequences and applications. Isotopes Environ Health Stud 51:155–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Shaver GR, Rastetter EB, Salmon V et al (2013) Pan-Arctic modelling of net ecosystem exchange of CO2. Philos Trans R Soc B 368:20120485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sjögerstern S, van der Wal R, Woodin SJ (2006) Small-scale hydrological variation determines landscape CO2 fluxes in the high arctic. Biogeochem 80:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tarnocai C, Canadell JG, Schuur EAG, Kuhry P, Mazhitova G, Zimov SA (2009) Soil organic carbon pools in the northern circumpolar permafrost region. Global Biogeochem Cycles. doi: 10.1029/2008GB003327 Google Scholar
  59. Uchida M, Kishimoto A, Muraoka H (2010) Seasonal shift in factors controlling net ecosystem production in a high arctic terrestrial ecosystems. J Plant Res 123:79–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Welker JM, Fahnestock JT, Henry GHR et al (2004) CO2 exchange in three Canadian high arctic ecosystems: response to long-term experimental warming. Glob Chang Biol 10:1981–1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yoshitake S, Uchida M, Koizumi H, Kanda H, Nakatsubo T (2010) Production of biological soil crusts in the early stage of primary succession on a high arctic glacier foreland. New Phytol 186:451–460CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Cannone
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • A. Augusti
    • 2
  • F. Malfasi
    • 1
  • E. Pallozzi
    • 2
  • C. Calfapietra
    • 2
    • 4
  • E. Brugnoli
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Theoretical and Applied SciencesInsubria UniversityComoItaly
  2. 2.Institute of Agro-environmental and Forest Biology (IBAF)National Council of Research (CNR)PoranoItaly
  3. 3.Department of Earth System Science and Environmental TechnologiesNational Council of Research (CNR)RomeItaly
  4. 4.Czechglobe, Global Change Research CentreAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations