Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Benefits of CO2 enrichment on crop plants are modified by soil water status

  • Published:
Plant and Soil Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three species, wheat, maize and cotton, were grown in pots and subjected to high (85–100% field capacity, ΘF), medium (65–85% ΘF) and low (45–65% ΘF) soil moisture treatments and high (700 μl l−1) and low (350 μl l−1) CO2 concentrations. Biomass production, photosynthesis, evapotranspiration and crop water use efficiency were investigated. Results showed that the daily photosynthesis rate was increased more in wheat and cotton at high [CO2] than in maize. In addition, differences were more substantial at low soil water treatment than at high soil water treatment. The daily leaf transpiration was reduced significantly in the three crops at the high CO2 concentration. The decrease at low soil water was smaller than at high soil water. Crop biomass production responses showed a pattern similar to photosynthesis, but the CO2-induced increase was more pronounced in root production than shoot production under all soil water treatments. Low soil water treatment led to more root biomass under high [CO2] than high soil water treatment. CO2 enrichment caused a higher leaf water use efficiency (WUE) of three crops and the increase was more significant in low than in high soil water treatment. Crop community WUE was also increased by CO2 enrichment, but the increase in wheat and cotton was much greater than in maize. We conclude that at least in the short-term, C3 plants such as wheat and cotton may benefit from CO2 enrichment especially under water shortage condition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen L H Jr, Boote K J, Jones J W, Jones P H, Valle R R, Acock B, Rogers H H and Dahlman R C 1987 Response of vegetation to rising carbon dioxide: photosynthesis biomass and seed yield of soybean. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 1, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson R W and Bazzaz F A 1980 The effects of elevated CO2 concentration on growth photosynthesis transpiration and water use efficiency of plants. In Environmental and Climatic Impact of Coal Utilization. Eds. J Singh and A Deepak. pp 609–612. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornic G 1994 Drought stress and high light effects on leaf photosynthesis. In Photoinhibition of Photosynthesis: From Molecular Mechanisms to the Field. Eds. N R Baker and H R Boyer. pp 97–313. Bios Scientific Publishers, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cure J D and Acock B 1986 Crop responses to carbon dioxide doublings literature survey. Agr. Forest. Meteorol. 38, 127–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlman R C, Strain B R and Rogers H H 1985 Research on the response of vegetation to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide. J. Environ. Qual. 14, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drake B J, Gonzalez-Meler M A and Long S P 1997 More efficient plants: a consequence of rising atmospheric CO2? Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 48, 609–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drt D R, Oxborough K and Wise R R 1994 Depressions of photosynthesis in crops with water deficient. In Photoinhibition of Photosynthesis: From Molecular Mechanisms to the Field. Eds. N R Baker and H R Boyer. pp 315–329. Bios Scientific Publishers, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goudriaan J 1989 Simulation of micrometeorology of crops some methods and their problems and a few results. Agr. Forest. Meteorol. 47, 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hesketh J D 1963 Limitations to photosynthesis responsible for differences among species. Crop Sci. 3, 493–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hileman D R, Huluda G and Kenjugc P K 1994 Canopy photosynthesis and transpiration of field-grown cotton exposed to free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) and differential irrigation. Agr. Forest. Meteorol. 70, 189–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hungate B A, Dijkstra P, Johnson D W, Hinkle C R, and Drake B G 1999 Elevated CO2 increases nitrogen fixation and decreases soil nitrogen mineralization in Florida scrub oak. Global Change Biol. 5, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunsaker D J, Hendrey G R and Kimball B A 1994 Cotton evapotranspiration under field conditions with CO2 enrichment and variable soil moisture regimes. Agr. Forest. Meteorol. 70, 247–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Idso S B, Kimball B F and Clawson K L 1984 Quantifying effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on stomatal conductance and evapotranspiration of water hyacinth via infrared thermometry. Agr. Forest. Meteorol. 33, 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson K H 1993 Growth and ecophysiological responses of black spruce seedlings to elevated CO2 under varied water and nutrient additions. Can. J. For. Res. 23, 1033–1042.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang S, Cai H J and Liu X M 1996 Effect of atmospheric CO2 concentration enrichment upon farmland evapotranspiration and crop water use. Chinese J. Hydraulic Engineering 4, 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang S, Cai H J and Ma Q L 1995 Effect of atmospheric CO2 concentration enrichment upon spring wheat water use and evapotranspiration. Acta Univ. Agr. BorealI-Occidentalis 3, 70–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield T A, Hetherington A M and Atkinson C J 1990 Some current aspects of stomatal physiology. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 41, 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton P C D, Clark H, Bell C C and Glasgow E M 1996 Interaction of soil moisture and elevated CO2 on the above-ground growth rate root length density and gas exchange of curves from temperate pasture. J. Exp. Bot. 47, 771–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owensby C E, Ham J M, Knapp A K and Auen L M 1999 Biomass production and species composition change in a tallgrass prairie ecosystem after long-term exposure to elevated atmospheric CO2. Global Change Biol Strain B R and Cure J D 1985 Direct effects of increasing carbon dioxide on vegetation. In DOE/ER0238 US Department of Energy Office of Energy Research Washington DC and Duke University. pp 208-214. Durham NC.

  • Tubiello F N, Rosenzweig C, Kimball B A, Pinter Jr. P J, Wall G W, Hunsaker D J, LaMorte R L and Garcia R L 1999 Testing CERES-wheat with free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) experiment data: CO2 and water interactions. Agron. J. 91, 247–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyree M T and Alexander J D 1993 Plants water relations and the effects of elevated CO2: a review and suggestion for future research. Vegetation 104, 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Agricultural Water–Soil Engineering, Northwest Agricultural University, YangLing Shaanxi, China

    Shaozhong Kang, Fucang Zhang & Xiaotao Hu

  2. Department of Biology, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

    Jianhua Zhang

Authors
  1. Shaozhong Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fucang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaotao Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jianhua Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jianhua Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kang, S., Zhang, F., Hu, X. et al. Benefits of CO2 enrichment on crop plants are modified by soil water status. Plant and Soil 238, 69–77 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014244413067

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014244413067

Search

Navigation