How climate change affects plant growth

 Resize text        

Global warming may initially make the grass greener, but not for long, according to new research conducted at Northern Arizona University.

The study, published this week in Nature Climate Change, shows that plants may thrive in the early stages of a warming environment but begin to deteriorate quickly.

“We were really surprised by the pattern, where the initial boost in growth just went away,” said Zhuoting Wu, NAU doctoral graduate in biology. “As the ecosystems adjust, the responses changed.” 

Researchers subjected four grassland ecosystems to simulated climate change during the decade-long study. Plants grew more the first year in the global warming treatment, but this effect progressively diminished over the next nine years, and finally disappeared.

The research reports the long-term effects of global warming on plant growth, the plant species that make up the community, and the changes in how plants use or retain essential resources like nitrogen. The team transplanted four grassland ecosystems from higher to lower elevation to simulate a future warmer environment, and coupled the warming with the range of predicted changes in precipitation—more, the same, or less. The grasslands studied were typical of those found in northern Arizona along elevation gradients from the San Francisco Peaks down to the great basin desert.

The researchers found that long-term warming resulted in loss of native species and encroachment of species typical of warmer environments, pushing the plant community toward less productive species. The warmed grasslands also cycled nitrogen more rapidly, an effect that should make more nitrogen available to plants, helping them grow more. But instead much of the nitrogen was lost, converted to nitrogen gases lost to the atmosphere or leached out with rainfall washing through the soil.

Bruce Hungate, senior author of the study and NAU Biological Sciences professor, said the research findings challenge the expectation that warming will increase nitrogen availability and cause a sustained increase in plant productivity.

“Faster nitrogen turnover stimulated nitrogen losses, likely reducing the effect of warming on plant growth,” Hungate said. “More generally, changes in species, changes in element cycles—these really make a difference. It’s classic systems ecology: the initial responses elicit knock-on effects which here came back to bite the plants. These ecosystem feedbacks are critical. You just can’t figure this out with plants grown in a greenhouse. ”

The findings caution against extrapolating from short-term experiments, or experiments in a greenhouse, where experimenters cannot measure the feedbacks from changes in the plant community and from nutrient cycles.  The research will continue at least five more years with current funding from the National Science Foundation and, Hungate said, hopefully for another five years after that.

“The long-term perspective is key. We were surprised, and I’m guessing there are more surprises in store.”

Additional coauthors include George Koch, NAU professor of Biological Sciences, and Paul Dijkstra, assistant research professor of Biological Sciences.


Sponsored Links


Comments (3) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

david dunn    
uk  |  April, 09, 2012 at 10:39 AM

The ecosystems are finely balanced and as shown here it affect the Nitrogen cycle in uncertain ways , it also has tremendous effects on all the Eco-systems and their inter-relationships within the soil.
The long term effects of mono-cropping has similar effects on the soils with loss of soil carbon , micro-flora which have plant heath promoters and water and air retention within the soil structure.

I have been advocating that land as a natural resource should be taxed according to the damage that is being done to it compared to its natural state, so depending on the way agriculture is conducted the level of tax would vary depending on the soils Eco-systems and ability to help the planet recycle and store carbon especially.

mememine    
Tulsa  |  April, 09, 2012 at 01:37 PM

Voter support for a Human CO2 climate crisis will continue to slip away until the millions of people in the global scientific community start acting like climate change is the “greatest threat to the planet” and to their children as well.
Deny that.
So with support all but gone, continuing to alienate voters by condemning their children to the greenhouse gas ovens will keep Conservatives in power forever.
REAL planet lovers are happy, not disappointed the crisis wasn’t real.
Deny that.
And some day, threatening our children like this will have real legal consequences.

Christopher Calder    
Eugene, Oregon  |  April, 10, 2012 at 10:53 AM

There is serious evidence that current warming trends are no man made. The assumption that man made global warming is 100% proven is incorrect. The experiment is too big with too many variables and way too much conflicting data for anyone to be certain.

We should not take rash or suicidal steps to try to control something that may be driven by solar output or the orbit of the earth, two factors we cannot influence.


Feedback Form
Leads to Insight