Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground

Autores
Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel; Marshall, John D.; Binkley, Dan
Año de publicación
2024
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Large trees in plantations generally produce more wood per unit of resource use than small trees. Two processes may account for this pattern: greater photosynthetic resource use efficiency or greater partitioning of carbon to wood production. We estimated gross primary production (GPP) at the individual scale by combining transpiration with photosynthetic water-use efficiency of Eucalyptus trees. Aboveground production fluxes were estimated using allometric equations and modeled respiration; total belowground carbon fluxes (TBCF) were estimated by subtracting aboveground fluxes from GPP. Partitioning was estimated by dividing component fluxes by GPP. Dominant trees produced almost three times as much wood as suppressed trees. They used 25 ± 10% (mean ± SD) of their photosynthates for wood production, whereas suppressed trees only used 12 ± 2%. By contrast, dominant trees used 27 ± 19% of their photosynthate belowground, whereas suppressed trees used 58 ± 5%. Intermediate trees lay between these extremes. Photosynthetic water-use efficiency of dominant trees was c. 13% greater than the efficiency of suppressed trees. Suppressed trees used more than twice as much of their photosynthate belowground and less than half as much aboveground compared with dominant trees. Differences in carbon partitioning were much greater than differences in GPP or photosynthetic water-use efficiency.
EEA Delta del Paraná
Fil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; Argentina
Fil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Colorado State University. Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability. Graduate Degree Program in Ecology; Estados Unidos
Fil: Marshall, John D. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Forest Ecology and Management; Suecia
Fil: Marshall, John D. Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung; Alemania
Fil: Marshall, John D. Gothenburg University. Department of Geological Sciences; Suecia
Fil: Marshall, John D. Czech Globe. Department of Energy and Matter Fluxes; República Checa
Fil: Binkley, Dan. Northern Arizona University. School of Forestry; Estados Unidos
Fuente
New Phytologist : 1-12 (First published: 19 April 2024)
Materia
Eucalyptus
Carbono
Ecología
Producción de Madera
Eficacia en el Uso del Agua
Carbon
Ecology
Wood Production
Water-use Efficiency
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso restringido
Condiciones de uso
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/17575
Acceder
id INTADig_29f5237c821e04bf422ab725b913345e
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/17575
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowgroundFernandez Tschieder, EzequielMarshall, John D.Binkley, DanEucalyptusCarbonoEcologíaProducción de MaderaEficacia en el Uso del AguaCarbonEcologyWood ProductionWater-use EfficiencyLarge trees in plantations generally produce more wood per unit of resource use than small trees. Two processes may account for this pattern: greater photosynthetic resource use efficiency or greater partitioning of carbon to wood production. We estimated gross primary production (GPP) at the individual scale by combining transpiration with photosynthetic water-use efficiency of Eucalyptus trees. Aboveground production fluxes were estimated using allometric equations and modeled respiration; total belowground carbon fluxes (TBCF) were estimated by subtracting aboveground fluxes from GPP. Partitioning was estimated by dividing component fluxes by GPP. Dominant trees produced almost three times as much wood as suppressed trees. They used 25 ± 10% (mean ± SD) of their photosynthates for wood production, whereas suppressed trees only used 12 ± 2%. By contrast, dominant trees used 27 ± 19% of their photosynthate belowground, whereas suppressed trees used 58 ± 5%. Intermediate trees lay between these extremes. Photosynthetic water-use efficiency of dominant trees was c. 13% greater than the efficiency of suppressed trees. Suppressed trees used more than twice as much of their photosynthate belowground and less than half as much aboveground compared with dominant trees. Differences in carbon partitioning were much greater than differences in GPP or photosynthetic water-use efficiency.EEA Delta del ParanáFil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; ArgentinaFil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Colorado State University. Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability. Graduate Degree Program in Ecology; Estados UnidosFil: Marshall, John D. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Forest Ecology and Management; SueciaFil: Marshall, John D. Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung; AlemaniaFil: Marshall, John D. Gothenburg University. Department of Geological Sciences; SueciaFil: Marshall, John D. Czech Globe. Department of Energy and Matter Fluxes; República ChecaFil: Binkley, Dan. Northern Arizona University. School of Forestry; Estados UnidosWiley2024-04-29T12:21:25Z2024-04-29T12:21:25Z2024-04info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/17575https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.197640028-646X1469-8137https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19764New Phytologist : 1-12 (First published: 19 April 2024)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)2025-09-29T13:46:29Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/17575instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-09-29 13:46:29.889INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
title Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
spellingShingle Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel
Eucalyptus
Carbono
Ecología
Producción de Madera
Eficacia en el Uso del Agua
Carbon
Ecology
Wood Production
Water-use Efficiency
title_short Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
title_full Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
title_fullStr Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
title_full_unstemmed Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
title_sort Carbon budget at the individual-tree scale: dominant Eucalyptus trees partition less carbon belowground
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel
Marshall, John D.
Binkley, Dan
author Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel
author_facet Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel
Marshall, John D.
Binkley, Dan
author_role author
author2 Marshall, John D.
Binkley, Dan
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Eucalyptus
Carbono
Ecología
Producción de Madera
Eficacia en el Uso del Agua
Carbon
Ecology
Wood Production
Water-use Efficiency
topic Eucalyptus
Carbono
Ecología
Producción de Madera
Eficacia en el Uso del Agua
Carbon
Ecology
Wood Production
Water-use Efficiency
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Large trees in plantations generally produce more wood per unit of resource use than small trees. Two processes may account for this pattern: greater photosynthetic resource use efficiency or greater partitioning of carbon to wood production. We estimated gross primary production (GPP) at the individual scale by combining transpiration with photosynthetic water-use efficiency of Eucalyptus trees. Aboveground production fluxes were estimated using allometric equations and modeled respiration; total belowground carbon fluxes (TBCF) were estimated by subtracting aboveground fluxes from GPP. Partitioning was estimated by dividing component fluxes by GPP. Dominant trees produced almost three times as much wood as suppressed trees. They used 25 ± 10% (mean ± SD) of their photosynthates for wood production, whereas suppressed trees only used 12 ± 2%. By contrast, dominant trees used 27 ± 19% of their photosynthate belowground, whereas suppressed trees used 58 ± 5%. Intermediate trees lay between these extremes. Photosynthetic water-use efficiency of dominant trees was c. 13% greater than the efficiency of suppressed trees. Suppressed trees used more than twice as much of their photosynthate belowground and less than half as much aboveground compared with dominant trees. Differences in carbon partitioning were much greater than differences in GPP or photosynthetic water-use efficiency.
EEA Delta del Paraná
Fil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Delta del Paraná; Argentina
Fil: Fernandez Tschieder, Ezequiel. Colorado State University. Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability. Graduate Degree Program in Ecology; Estados Unidos
Fil: Marshall, John D. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Forest Ecology and Management; Suecia
Fil: Marshall, John D. Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung; Alemania
Fil: Marshall, John D. Gothenburg University. Department of Geological Sciences; Suecia
Fil: Marshall, John D. Czech Globe. Department of Energy and Matter Fluxes; República Checa
Fil: Binkley, Dan. Northern Arizona University. School of Forestry; Estados Unidos
description Large trees in plantations generally produce more wood per unit of resource use than small trees. Two processes may account for this pattern: greater photosynthetic resource use efficiency or greater partitioning of carbon to wood production. We estimated gross primary production (GPP) at the individual scale by combining transpiration with photosynthetic water-use efficiency of Eucalyptus trees. Aboveground production fluxes were estimated using allometric equations and modeled respiration; total belowground carbon fluxes (TBCF) were estimated by subtracting aboveground fluxes from GPP. Partitioning was estimated by dividing component fluxes by GPP. Dominant trees produced almost three times as much wood as suppressed trees. They used 25 ± 10% (mean ± SD) of their photosynthates for wood production, whereas suppressed trees only used 12 ± 2%. By contrast, dominant trees used 27 ± 19% of their photosynthate belowground, whereas suppressed trees used 58 ± 5%. Intermediate trees lay between these extremes. Photosynthetic water-use efficiency of dominant trees was c. 13% greater than the efficiency of suppressed trees. Suppressed trees used more than twice as much of their photosynthate belowground and less than half as much aboveground compared with dominant trees. Differences in carbon partitioning were much greater than differences in GPP or photosynthetic water-use efficiency.
publishDate 2024
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2024-04-29T12:21:25Z
2024-04-29T12:21:25Z
2024-04
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/17575
https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.19764
0028-646X
1469-8137
https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19764
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/17575
https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.19764
https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19764
identifier_str_mv 0028-646X
1469-8137
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
eu_rights_str_mv restrictedAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv New Phytologist : 1-12 (First published: 19 April 2024)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1844619187552518144
score 12.559606

Publicaciones similares