Journal of Plant Research

, 121:137 | Cite as

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

  • Hiroyuki Muraoka
  • Hibiki Noda
  • Masaki Uchida
  • Toshiyuki Ohtsuka
  • Hiroshi Koizumi
  • Takayuki Nakatsubo
Regular Paper


Studies on terrestrial ecosystems in the high Arctic region have focused on the response of these ecosystems to global environmental change and their carbon sequestration capacity in relation to ecosystem function. We report here our study of the photosynthetic characteristics and biomass distribution of the dominant vascular plant species, Salix polaris, Dryas octopetala and Saxifraga oppositifolia, in the high Arctic tundra ecosystem at Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard (78.5°N, 11.5°E). We also estimated net primary production (NPP) along both the successional gradient created by the proglacial chronosequence and the topographical gradient. The light-saturated photosynthesis rate (Amax) differed among the species, with approximately 124.1 nmol CO2 g−1leaf s−1 for Sal. polaris, 57.8 for D. octopetala and 24.4 for Sax. oppositifolia, and was highly correlated with the leaf nitrogen (N) content for all three species. The photosynthetic N use efficiency was the highest in Sal. polaris and lowest in Sax. oppositifolia. Distributions of Sal. polaris and D. octopetala were restricted to the area where soil nutrient availability was high, while Sax. oppositifolia was able to establish at the front of a glacier, where nutrient availability is low, but tended to be dominated by other vascular plants in high nutrient areas. The NPP reflected the photosynthetic capacity and biomass distribution in that it increased with the successional status; the contribution of Sal. polaris reached as high as 12-fold that of Sax. oppositifolia.


High Arctic tundra ecosystem Net primary production Photosynthesis Salix polaris Saxifraga oppositifolia Svalbard 


  1. Bekku YS, Kume A, Masuzawa T, Kanda H, Nakatsubo T, Koizumi H (2004a) Soil respiration in a high Arctic glacier foreland in Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Polar Biosci 17:36–46Google Scholar
  2. Bekku YS, Nakatsubo T, Kume A, Koizumi H (2004b) Soil microbial biomass, respiration rate, and temperature dependence on a successional glacier foreland in Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Arct Antarct Alp Res 36:395–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bilger W, Schreiber U, Bock M (1995) Determination of the quantum efficiency of photosystem II and of non-photochemical quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence in the field. Oecologia 102:425–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Billings WD, Luken JO, Mortensen DA, Pterson KM (1982) Arctic tundra: a source or sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide in a changing environment? Oecologia 53:7–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bliss LC, Svoboda J (1984) Plant communities and plant production in the western Queen Elizabeth Islands. Holarct Ecol 7:325–344Google Scholar
  6. Bliss LC, Courtin GM, Pattie DL, Riewe RR, Whitfield DWA, Widden P (1973) Arctic tundra ecosystems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:359–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chapin III FS (1989) The cost of tundra plant structures: evaluation of concepts and currencies. Am Nat 133:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chapin III FS, Shaver GR (1996) Physiological and growth responses of arctic plants to a field experiment simulating climatic change. Ecology 77:822–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapin III FS, Autumn K, Pugnaire F (1993) Evolution of suites of traits in response to environmental stress. Am Nat 142:S78–S92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawford RMM, Chapman HM, Abbott RJ, Balfour J (1993) Potential impact of climatic warming on Arctic vegetation. Flora 188:367–381Google Scholar
  11. Evans JR (1989) Photosynthesis and nitrogen relationships in leaves of C3 plants. Oecologia 78:9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Field CB, Mooney HR (1986) The photosynthesis – nitrogen relationship in wild plants. In: Givnish TJ (eds) On the economy of plant form and function. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 25–55Google Scholar
  13. Gamon JA, Qiu H (1999) Ecological applications of remote sensing at multiple scales. In: Pugnaire FI, Valladares F (eds) Handbook of functional plant ecology. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 805–846Google Scholar
  14. Genty B, Briantais J-M, Baker NR (1989) The relationship between the quantum yield of photosynthetic electron transport and quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. Biochim Biophys Acta 990:87–92Google Scholar
  15. Grime JP (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Grime JP (1994) The role of plasticity in exploiting environmental heterogeneity. In: Caldwell MM, Pearcy RW (eds) Exploitation of environmental heterogeneity by plants: ecophysiological process above- and below ground. Academic, New York, pp 2–20Google Scholar
  17. Hodkinson ID, Coulson SJ, Webb NR (2003) Community assembly along proglacial chronosequences in the high Arctic: vegetation and soil development in north-west Svalbard. J Ecol 91:651–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson LC, Shaver GR, Cades DH, Rastetter E, Nadelhoffer K, Giblin A, Laundre J, Stanley A (2000) Plant carbon-nutrient interactions control CO2 exchange in Alaskan wet sedge tundra ecosystems. Ecology 81:453–469Google Scholar
  20. Kudo G, Molau U, Wada N (2001) Leaf-trait variation of tundra plants along a climatic gradient: an integration of responses in evergreen and deciduous species. Arct Antarct Alp Res 33:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kume A, Bekku YS, Hanba YT, Kanda H (2003) Carbon isotope discrimination in diverging growth forms of Saxifraga oppositifolia in different successional stages in a high arctic glacier fores land. Arct Antarct Alp Res 35:377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Muraoka H, Uchida M, Mishio M, Nakatsubo T, Kanda H, Koizumi H (2002) Leaf photosynthetic characteristics and net primary production of the polar willow (Salix polaris) in a high arctic polar semi-desert, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Can J Bot 80:1193–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nakatsubo T, Bekky Y, Kume A, Koizumi H (1998) Respiration of the belowground part of vascular plants: its contribution to total soil respiration on a successional glacier foreland in Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Polar Res 17:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakatsubo T, Bekku YS, Uchida M, Muraoka H, Kume A, Ohtsuka T, Masuzawa T, Kanda H, Koizumi H (2005) Ecosystem development and carbon cycle on a glacier foreland in the high Arctic, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. J Plant Res 118:173–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nilsen L, Brossard T, Joly D (1999a) Mapping plant communities in a local Arctic landscape applying a scanned infrared aerial photograph in a geographical information system. Int J Remote Sens 20:463–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nilsen L, Elvebakk A, Brossard T, Joly D (1999b) Mapping and analyzing arctic vegetation: evaluating a method coupling numerical classification of vegetation a data with SPOT satellite data in a probability model. Int J Remote Sens 20:2947–2977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ohtsuka T, Adachi M, Uchida M, Nakatsubo T (2006) Relationships between vegetation types and soil properties along a topographical gradient on the northern coast of the Brogger Peninsula, Svalbard. Polar Biosci 19:63–72Google Scholar
  28. Schreiber U, Bilger W, Neubauer C (1995) Chlorophyll fluorescence as a nonintrusive indicator for rapid assessment of in vivo photosynthesis. In: Schulze E-D, Caldwell MM (eds) Ecophysiology of photosynthesis. Springer, Berlin, pp 49–70Google Scholar
  29. Spjelkavik S (1995) A satellite-based map compared to a traditional vegetation map of Arctic vegetation in the Ny-Ålesund area. Svalbard Polar Rec 31:257–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Street LE, Shaver GR, Williams M, van Wijk MT (2007) What is the relationship between changes in canopy leaf area and changes in photosynthetic CO2 flux in arctic ecosystems? J Ecol 95:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thornley JHM (1976) Mathematical models in plant physiology. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Tolvanen A, Henry GHR (2001) Responses of carbon and nitrogen concentrations in high arctic plants to experimental warming. Can J Bot 79:711–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Uchida M, Muraoka H, Nakatsubo T, Bekku Y, Ueno T, Kanda H, Koizumi H (2002) Net photosynthesis, respiration, and production of the moss Sanionia uncinata on a glacier foreland in the high Arctic, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Arct Antarct Alp Res 34:287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van der Wal R, Madan N, van Lieshout S, Dormann C, Langvatn R, Albon SD (2000) Trading forage quality for quantity? Plant phenology and patch choice by Svalbard reindeer. Oecologia 123:108–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Wijk MT, Williams M, Shaver GR (2005) Tight coupling between leaf area index and foliage N content in arctic plant communities. Oecologia 142:421–427PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Williams M, Rastetter EB (1999) Vegetation characteristics and primary productivity along an arctic transect: implications for scaling-up. J Ecol 87:885–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wookey PA, Robinson CH, Parsons AN, Welker JM, Press MC, Callaghan TV, Lee JA (1995) Environmental constraints on the growth, photosynthesis and reproductive development of Dryas octopetala at a high Arctic polar semi-desert, Svalbard. Oecologia 102:478–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yoshitake S, Uchida M, Koizumi H, Nakatsubo T (2007) Carbon and nitrogen limitation of soil microbial respiration in a High Arctic successional glacier foreland near Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard. Polar Res 26:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Botanical Society of Japan and Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroyuki Muraoka
    • 1
  • Hibiki Noda
    • 1
  • Masaki Uchida
    • 2
  • Toshiyuki Ohtsuka
    • 3
  • Hiroshi Koizumi
    • 1
  • Takayuki Nakatsubo
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute for Basin Ecosystem StudiesGifu UniversityGifuJapan
  2. 2.Department of BiologyNational Institute of Polar ResearchItabashi-ku, TokyoJapan
  3. 3.Faculty of ScienceIbaraki UniversityMitoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Environmental Dynamics and Management, Graduate School of Biosphere ScienceHiroshima UniversityHigashi-HiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations