Plant Gas Exchange in Urban LandscapesL. Brooke McDowell and Chris A. MartinDepartment of Plant Biology, Arizona State University |
||
IntroductionAn urban forest is displacing indigenous Sonoran Desert vegetation as the Phoenix metropolitan area expands. Some of the ecological benefits associated with growth of the urban forest are carbon dioxide and nutrient recycling, energy conservation, and enhanced human well being (Botkin and Beveridge, 1997). Knowledge of how the urban forest differs from native Sonoran Desert vegetation in terms of carbon and water cycling is lacking. Of particular interest is how land use changes and landscape design affect primary productivity and water use in various urban landscape patch types. Long-term monitoring of gas exchange, irrigation practices, and microclimate in urban landscape plants was initiated in 1998 to research this question. MethodsEffects of landscape design and land use history on plant gas exchange parameters were evaluated in a factorial site matrix of formerly desert or agricultural land uses and xeric or mesic residential landscape designs within the Phoenix metropolitan area. Remnant Sonoran Desert sites and an irrigated alfalfa agricultural field were controls. Instantaneous measurements of maximum shoot carbon assimilation (A), conductance (gs), and transpiration (E) were made monthly within three replicates of each site type during 1998. The time-of-day for maximum A was estimated based on preliminary seasonal measurements of diel gas exchange patterns (McDowell and Martin, 1998). Measurements were made on three plant life forms; trees, shrubs, and ground covers. Data analysis was conducted using the SAS GLM analysis of variance procedure. Results
Conclusions
CitationsBotkin, D.B. and Beveridge, C.E. (1997) Cities as environments. Urban Ecosystems 1, 3-19. McDowell, L.B. and Martin, C.A. (1998) Plant gas exchange and water status in Sonoran Desert landscapes. Second Annual Life Sciences Graduate Symposium, Arizona State University. |
Figure 1. Seasonal patterns of carbon assimilation (A) and transpirational water loss (E).*
Figure 2. Seasonal patterns of shoot temperature and instantaneous transpiration efficiency (ITE = A/E). *
Figure 3. Seasonal patterns of shoot to air vapor pressure deficit (VPD) and stomatal conductance (gs). * * Values are monthly means for all plants measured, n=1736. Where error bars are not visible they are obscured by the symbol.
|
|