When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration?
Increasing vapor pressure deficit (VPD) increases atmospheric demand for water. While increased evapotranspiration (ET) in response to increased atmospheric demand seems intuitive, plants are capable of reducing ET in response to increased VPD by closing their stomata. We examine which effect domina...
Published in: | Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919419/ https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 |
id |
ftpubmed:oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:6919419 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftpubmed:oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:6919419 2023-05-15T15:09:35+02:00 When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? Massmann, Adam Gentine, Pierre Lin, Changjie 2019-10-28 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919419/ https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 en eng John Wiley and Sons Inc. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919419/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 ©2019. The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. CC-BY Research Articles Text 2019 ftpubmed https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 2020-01-05T01:35:56Z Increasing vapor pressure deficit (VPD) increases atmospheric demand for water. While increased evapotranspiration (ET) in response to increased atmospheric demand seems intuitive, plants are capable of reducing ET in response to increased VPD by closing their stomata. We examine which effect dominates the response to increasing VPD: atmospheric demand and increases in ET or plant response (stomata closure) and decreases in ET. We use Penman‐Monteith, combined with semiempirical optimal stomatal regulation theory and underlying water use efficiency, to develop a theoretical framework for assessing ET response to VPD. The theory suggests that depending on the environment and plant characteristics, ET response to increasing VPD can vary from strongly decreasing to increasing, highlighting the diversity of plant water regulation strategies. The ET response varies due to (1) climate, with tropical and temperate climates more likely to exhibit a positive ET response to increasing VPD than boreal and arctic climates; (2) photosynthesis strategy, with C3 plants more likely to exhibit a positive ET response than C4 plants; and (3) plant type, with crops more likely to exhibit a positive ET response, and shrubs and gymniosperm trees more likely to exhibit a negative ET response. These results, derived from previous literature connecting plant parameters to plant and climate characteristics, highlight the utility of our simplified framework for understanding complex land‐atmosphere systems in terms of idealized scenarios in which ET responds to VPD only. This response is otherwise challenging to assess in an environment where many processes coevolve together. Text Arctic PubMed Central (PMC) Arctic Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems 11 10 3305 3320 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
PubMed Central (PMC) |
op_collection_id |
ftpubmed |
language |
English |
topic |
Research Articles |
spellingShingle |
Research Articles Massmann, Adam Gentine, Pierre Lin, Changjie When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
topic_facet |
Research Articles |
description |
Increasing vapor pressure deficit (VPD) increases atmospheric demand for water. While increased evapotranspiration (ET) in response to increased atmospheric demand seems intuitive, plants are capable of reducing ET in response to increased VPD by closing their stomata. We examine which effect dominates the response to increasing VPD: atmospheric demand and increases in ET or plant response (stomata closure) and decreases in ET. We use Penman‐Monteith, combined with semiempirical optimal stomatal regulation theory and underlying water use efficiency, to develop a theoretical framework for assessing ET response to VPD. The theory suggests that depending on the environment and plant characteristics, ET response to increasing VPD can vary from strongly decreasing to increasing, highlighting the diversity of plant water regulation strategies. The ET response varies due to (1) climate, with tropical and temperate climates more likely to exhibit a positive ET response to increasing VPD than boreal and arctic climates; (2) photosynthesis strategy, with C3 plants more likely to exhibit a positive ET response than C4 plants; and (3) plant type, with crops more likely to exhibit a positive ET response, and shrubs and gymniosperm trees more likely to exhibit a negative ET response. These results, derived from previous literature connecting plant parameters to plant and climate characteristics, highlight the utility of our simplified framework for understanding complex land‐atmosphere systems in terms of idealized scenarios in which ET responds to VPD only. This response is otherwise challenging to assess in an environment where many processes coevolve together. |
format |
Text |
author |
Massmann, Adam Gentine, Pierre Lin, Changjie |
author_facet |
Massmann, Adam Gentine, Pierre Lin, Changjie |
author_sort |
Massmann, Adam |
title |
When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
title_short |
When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
title_full |
When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
title_fullStr |
When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
title_full_unstemmed |
When Does Vapor Pressure Deficit Drive or Reduce Evapotranspiration? |
title_sort |
when does vapor pressure deficit drive or reduce evapotranspiration? |
publisher |
John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
publishDate |
2019 |
url |
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919419/ https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 |
geographic |
Arctic |
geographic_facet |
Arctic |
genre |
Arctic |
genre_facet |
Arctic |
op_relation |
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919419/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 |
op_rights |
©2019. The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
op_rightsnorm |
CC-BY |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001790 |
container_title |
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems |
container_volume |
11 |
container_issue |
10 |
container_start_page |
3305 |
op_container_end_page |
3320 |
_version_ |
1766340749956218880 |