ORNL/CDIAC-120 NDP-072 A DATABASE OF WOODY VEGETATION RESPONSES TO ELEVATED ATMOSPHERIC CO2 Contributed by Peter S. Curtis Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio Prepared by Robert M. Cushman and Antoinette L. Brenkert* Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center *consultant, Washington, D.C. Environmental Sciences Division Publication No. 4888 Date Published: September 1999 Prepared for the Environmental Sciences Division Office of Biological and Environmental Research U.S. Department of Energy Budget Activity Number KP 12 04 01 0 Prepared by the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center Environmental Sciences Division OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6335 managed by LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY RESEARCH CORP. for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under contract DE-AC05-96OR22464 CONTENTS ABSTRACT 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2. APPLICATIONS OF THE DATA 3. DATA LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 4. DATA CHECKS AND PROCESSING PERFORMED BY CDIAC 5. INSTRUCTIONS FOR OBTAINING THE DATA AND DOCUMENTATION 6. REFERENCES 7. LISTING OF FILES PROVIDED 8. DESCRIPTION OF THE DOCUMENTATION FILE 9. DESCRIPTION, FORMAT, AND PARTIAL LISTINGS OF THE ASCII DATA FILES9 10. DESCRIPTION AND FORMAT OF THE LOTUS 1-2-3 BINARY SPREADSHEET FILES 11. SAS AND FORTRAN CODES TO ACCESS THE DATA APPENDIX A: SPECIES INCLUDED IN DATABASE APPENDIX B: FULL LISTING OF REFS.DAT (FILE 4) APPENDIX C: FULL LISTING OF COMMENTS.DAT (FILE 6) ABSTRACT Curtis, P. S., R. M. Cushman, and A. L. Brenkert. 1999. A Database of Woody Vegetation Responses to Elevated Atmospheric CO2. ORNL/CDIAC-120, NDP-072. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, U.S.A. To perform a statistically rigorous meta-analysis of research results on the response by woody vegetation to increased atmospheric CO2 levels, a multiparameter database of responses was compiled. Eighty-four independent CO2-enrichment studies, covering 65 species and 35 response parameters, met the necessary criteria for inclusion in the database: reporting mean response, sample size, and variance of the response (either as standard deviation or standard error). Data were retrieved from the published literature and unpublished reports. This numeric data package contains a 29-field data set of CO2-exposure experiment responses by woody plants (as both a flat ASCII file and a spreadsheet file), files listing the references to the CO2-exposure experiments and specific comments relevant to the data in the data set, and this documentation file (which includes SAS and Fortran codes to read the ASCII data file). The data files and this documentation are available without charge on a variety of media and via the Internet from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC). NDP-072 is an enhancement of previously published CDIAC DB-1018, with additional quality control and documentation (and some corrections to the data, detailed herein). Keywords: carbon dioxide, meta-analysis, vegetation 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION To perform a statistically rigorous synthesis of research results on the response by vegetation to increased atmospheric CO2 levels, a multiparameter database of woody-plant responses was compiled (Curtis 1996; Curtis and Wang 1998). Eighty-four independent CO2-enrichment studies, covering 65 species (listed in Appendix A) and 35 response parameters, met the necessary criteria for inclusion in the database: reporting mean response, sample size, and variance of the response (either as standard deviation or standard error). Data were retrieved from the published literature and in a few instances from unpublished reports. Meta-analytical methods (Cooper and Hedges 1994; Gurevitch and Hedges 1993; Gurevitch et al. 1992) have been applied to part of this database (Curtis 1996; Curtis and Wang 1998). Physiological "acclimation" or "downward regulation" of photosynthetic rates, stomatal conductance, dark respiration, and water-use efficiency of plants exposed to elevated CO2 levels can be analyzed, keeping the following definitions in mind. "Acclimation" is in general defined as "diminishing enhancement of photosynthesis by elevated CO2 with time" (Mousseau and Saugier 1992). "Downward regulation" can be defined as "the initial stimulation of enhanced photosynthesis and growth by atmospheric enrichment eroding with time" (Idso and Kimball 1992). The phenomenon is also called "downward acclimation" (Curtis and Teeri 1992): "following prolonged exposure to high CO2, photosynthetic capacity measured at either elevated or ambient CO2 partial pressure falls to below that of plants exposed only to ambient CO2." When more than one elevated CO2 treatment level was reported, only the elevated CO2 level that was approximately twice the ambient level was included in the database. Only the longest lasting exposure experiment results on photosynthetic rates, stomatal conductance, dark respiration and water use efficiency are included, however, not multiple measurements over time from the same plant. And only responses of plants measured at elevated levels of CO2 are included for evaluation of acclimatory responses. Durations of experimental exposures are always reported. 2. APPLICATIONS OF THE DATA This database was produced to support a meta-analysis of the effects of elevated CO2 on woody vegetation (Curtis 1996; Curtis and Wang 1998), and it was formatted accordingly. For other applications, the user should be aware that the data may be reported in more than one unit for a given variable (e.g., for dark respiration, the data are reported in units of mg/g/d, mmol/g/h, mmol/m2/h, umol/g/s, and umol/m2/s; and the experimental CO2 concentrations are reported in units of cm3/m3, Pa, ppm, ubar, ul/l, and umol/mol); this is not a problem for meta-analysis, but for other applications the user may need to convert the data to consistent units. The effects of environmental factors (e.g., nutrient levels, light intensity, temperature), stress treatments (e.g., drought, heat, ozone, ultraviolet-B radiation), and the effects of experimental conditions (e.g., duration of CO2 exposure, pot size, type of CO2 exposure facility) on plant responses to elevated CO2 levels can be explored with this database. 3. DATA LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS In many papers, the data were reported graphically, rather than numerically. In such cases, the data values reported herein were digitized from the printed figures and may therefore be less accurate. There might also have been some confusion because of the term "standard deviation." When a "standard deviation" was reported in a published paper, it was not generally possible to verify whether this value was a sample standard deviation or the standard deviation of the mean, which is sometimes used synonymously with standard error (i.e., standard error of the mean). Unfortunately, it was not possible to settle this issue definitively without personally contacting the authors of the published papers. In all cases, where not specified or known to be otherwise, a reported standard deviation was taken to be the sample standard deviation. If this was in error, then the standard deviation, standard error, and coefficient of variation reported in this database would all be incorrect. In some cases an error bar in a figure or confidence interval in a table was not specified as standard deviation or standard error, in which case the data contributors had to make an assumption from the error bar or confidence interval and the sample size. Instances where data were obtained by personal communication with the authors, or where standard deviation or standard error was inferred from the published data, are documented in the comments.* files (included as Appendix C). Where it was not possible to determine whether the reported variability was standard deviation or standard error, it was assumed to be standard error, for the sake of conservatism. In some cases (e.g., in long-term exposures), duration of the CO2 exposure was approximated. As noted in Sect. 2, various units may be used for the same parameter, so the user should apply caution in integrating observations from more than one paper. The units are reported in this database. 4. DATA CHECKS AND PROCESSING PERFORMED BY CDIAC An important part of the data packaging process at CDIAC involves the quality assurance (QA) of data before distribution. To guarantee data of the highest possible quality, CDIAC performs extensive QA checks, examining the data for completeness, reasonableness, and accuracy, through close cooperation with the data contributor. This database was originally published as CDIAC DB-1018, for which all entries in the data file were visually inspected for reasonableness and selected entries were spot-checked against the original publications. Additional quality-assurance and documentation was performed in the preparation of this numeric data package, and some data were corrected, as described herein. The following describes the additional data checks that were performed in the preparation of this numeric data package and the resulting revisions to the database. Using Excel, the spreadsheet included in the original database (db1018.xls) was converted to Lotus 1-2-3 format (ndp072.wk1). Headings were added to all columns. Lists of entries for each field were generated, to identify possible spelling variants, typographical errors, or order-of-magnitude errors in the original literature or in the compilation and data entry of the database. In fact, some variant spellings of GENUS, SPECIES, and P_UNIT were identified and corrected for the sake of consistency. The definition of parameter LFTNC was corrected, from "leaf N (TNC free weight basis)" to "leaf total nonstructural carbohydrate." The internal consistency of the reported standard errors (s.e.), standard deviations (s.d.), and sample sizes (n) was checked by calculating s.d. from the s.e. and n in DB-1018 and comparing the resulting values of s.d. with the values in DB-1018; discrepancies were resolved by checking the original publications. The ratio of elev/amb for X, SE, SD, and N was calculated; then all observations were ranked on the basis of each ratio to identify suspect values. The following lists the changes that were made to the original database. SOURCE: In entire spreadsheet, edited format of letters following T or F number to entirely lowercase. OBS 39 & 40 (PAP_NO 150): Corrected P_UNIT, from molH2O/m2/s to mmolH2O/m2/s. OBS 142 (PAP_NO 340): Replaced existing value of SD_AMB (0.9798) with value calculated from SE_AMB & N_AMB (2.4495). OBS 143 & 151 (PAP_NO 340): Corrected P_UNIT, from 0.01g/m2 to 102 g/g. OBS 150 (PAP_NO 340): Replaced existing value of SD_AMB (3.9192) with value calculated from SE_AMB & N_AMB (1.9596). OBS 191 (PAP_NO 505): Corrected SOURCE, from F2b to F2c. OBS 191 (PAP_NO 505): Replaced existing values of SD_AMB (5.134) and SD_ELEV (7.7972) with values calculated from SE & N (SD_AMB = 10.268 and SD_ELEV = 3.487). OBS 192 (PAP_NO 505): Replaced existing values of SD_AMB (5.367), SD_ELEV (5.747), SE_AMB (2.4), SE_ELEV (2.57), N_AMB (20), and N_ELEV (20) with values provided by author: SD_AMB (5.484), SD_ELEV (4.406), SE_AMB (2.452), SE_ELEV (1.970), N_AMB (5), and N_ELEV (5). OBS 195 (PAP_NO 505): Corrected P_UNIT, from mgdvvt/cm3 to mgdwt/cm3. OBS 210 & 211 (PAP_NO 506): Corrected P_UNIT, from umol/H2O/m2/s to mol/H2O/m2/s. OBS 364 & 365 (PAP_NO 746): Corrected SPECIES name from tulipfera to tulipifera. OBS 598-599, 606-607, and 612-613 (PAP_NO 2110): Existing values for means, standard error, and standard deviation multiplied by 100, based on personal communication from author, to correct for error in the published paper (in converting from % to mg/g, data were divided by 10 rather than multiplied by 10). Personal correspondence with author also confirmed that variance values given parenthetically in Table 2 were standard deviations; the tabulated data were corrected accordingly. To search for possible confusion between standard error and standard deviation (see Sect. 3, DATA LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS), coefficients of variation CV* (after Sokal and Rohlf 1981) were calculated for each PARAM from each mean, standard deviation, and sample size. It was expected that, for any PARAM, an anomalously low coefficient of variation for a given observation might signal that a standard error was mislabeled as a standard deviation; but no such anomalies were obvious. The database was sorted by PARAM, then by CV*_AMB and CV*_ELEV, and inspected for jumps of greater than fourfold between adjacent observations. The following lists those adjacent observations that warranted further scrutiny, along with the results of the checks: PARAM = BD OBS 396, PAP_NO 2004 (CV*_AMB = 35.5828): Contacted author and verified that "mean ñ SD"actually referred to sample standard deviation rather than standard error of the mean. OBS 758, PAP_NO 2224 (CV*_AMB = 623.5): Verified tabulated value against publication. PARAM = BGWT OBS 380, PAP_NO 2003 (CV*_AMB=0) and OBS 378, PAP_NO 2003 (CV*_AMB=2.3864): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = LFC OBS 599, PAP_NO 2110 (CV*_AMB=3.2753): Personal correspondence with author confirmed that variance values given parenthetically in Table 2 were standard deviations; the tabulated data were corrected accordingly. OBS 490, PAP_NO 2043 (CV*_AMB=16.6223): Verified tabulated value against publication. PARAM = LFNM OBS 414, PAP_NO 2027 (CV*_AMB=0.4532) and OBS 251, PAP_NO 550 (CV*_AMB=2.3447): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = PN OBS 513, PAP_NO 2045 (CV*_AMB=-99.0208): Verified tabulated value against publication. OBS 638, PAP_NO 2120 (CV*_AMB=2.6460): Based on personal communication; did not verify. PARAM = PN_AC OBS 520, PAP_NO 2045 (CV*_AMB=-99.0208) and OBS 622, PAP_NO 2117 (CV*_AMB=4.6109): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = RD_AC OBS 589, PAP_NO 2068 (CV*_AMB=96.7737) and OBS 162, PAP_NO 468 (CV*_AMB=1073.9583): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = INDLA OBS 18, PAP_NO 44 (CV*_ELEV=10.1423) and OBS 17, PAP_NO 44 (CV*_ELEV=43.9153): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = LFC OBS 599, PAP_NO 2110 (CV*_ELEV=1.9585): Personal correspondence with author confirmed that variance values given parenthetically in Table 2 were standard deviations; the tabulated data were corrected accordingly. OBS 490, PAP_NO 2043 (CV*_ELEV=13.8699): Corrected PARAM to LFTNC. PARAM = LFSTAR OBS 151, PAP_NO 340 (CV*_ELEV=39.3519) and OBS 143, PAP_NO 340 (CV*_ELEV=554.3478): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = LFTNC OBS 416, PAP_NO 2027 (CV*_ELEV=1.2777) and OBS 773, PAP_NO 2224 (CV*_ELEV=7.7891): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = RD_AC OBS 589, PAP_NO 2068 (CV*_ELEV=11.2191) and OBS 588, PAP_NO 2068 (CV*_ELEV=129.3295): Verified tabulated values against publication. PARAM = RGR OBS 759, PAP_NO 2224 (CV*_ELEV=10.8333): Verified tabulated value against publication. OBS 406 & 407, PAP_NO 2026 (CV*_ELEV=78.1250): The value for X_ELEV was corrected, from 0.0052 to 0.052, thereby lowering the calculated CV*_ELEV to a less anomalous 7.8125. OBS 192, PAP_NO 505 (CV*_ELEV=105.7878): Tabulated data changed, as described earlier in this section, based on personal communication from author. PARAM = TOTN OBS 613, PAP_NO 2110 (CV*_ELEV=39.0833) - Personal correspondence with author confirmed that variance values given parenthetically in Table 2 were standard deviations; the tabulated data were corrected accordingly. OBS 243, PAP_NO 521 (CV*_ELEV=177.7945) - Error bar not labeled as to SD or SE. Assumed by data contributor to be SE, based on size of the error bars and the sample size. 5. INSTRUCTIONS FOR OBTAINING THE DATA AND DOCUMENTATION This database (NDP-072) is available free of charge from CDIAC. The files are available via the Internet, from CDIAC's World-Wide-Web site (http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov), or from CDIAC's anonymous FTP (file transfer protocol) area (cdiac.esd.ornl.gov) as follows: FTP to cdiac.esd.ornl.gov (128.219.24.36). Enter "ftp" as the user id. Enter your electronic mail address as the password (e.g., fred@zulu.org). Change to the directory "pub/ndp072" (i.e., use the command "cd pub/ndp072"). Set ftp to get ASCII files by using the ftp "ascii" command. Retrieve the ASCII database documentation file by using the ftp "get ndp072.txt" command. Retrieve the ASCII data files by using the ftp "mget *.dat" command. Set ftp to get binary files by using the ftp "binary" command. Retrieve the binary spreadsheet files by using the ftp "mget *.wk1" command. Exit the system by using the ftp "quit" command. Uncompress files on computer, if obtained in compressed format. For non-Internet data acquisitions (e.g., floppy diskette or 8-mm tape), or for additional information, contact: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6335 U.S.A. Telephone: +1-423-574-3645 Telefax: +1-423-574-2232 E-mail: cdiac@ornl.gov Note: After 1 November 1999, the area code 423 will be changed to 865. 6. REFERENCES Cooper, H., and L. V. Hedges. 1994. The Handbook of Research Synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York. Curtis, P. S. 1996. A meta-analysis of leaf gas exchange and nitrogen in trees grown under elevated carbon dioxide. Plant, Cell and Environment 19:127-137. Curtis, P. S., and J. A. Teeri. 1992. Seasonal responses of leaf gas exchange to elevated carbon dioxide in Populus grandidentata. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 22:1320-1325. Curtis, P. S., and X. Wang. 1998. A meta-analysis of elevated CO2 effects on woody plant mass, form, and physiology. Oecologia 113:299-313. Gurevitch, J., and L. V. Hedges. 1993. Meta-analysis: Combining the results of independent experiments. Pp. 378-398. In S. M. Scheiner and J. Gurevitch (eds.), Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments. Chapman and Hall, New York. Gurevitch, J., L. L. Morrow, A. Wallace, and J. S. Walsch. 1992. A meta-analysis of competition in field experiments. American Naturalist 140:539-572. Idso, S. B., and B. A. Kimball. 1992. Effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on photosynthesis, respiration, and growth of sour orange trees. Plant Physiology 99:341-343. Mousseau, M., and B. Saugier. 1992. The direct effect of increased CO2 on gas exchange and growth of forest tree species. Journal of Experimental Botany 43:1121-1130. Sokal, R. R., and F. J. Rohlf. 1981. Biometry. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York. Strain, B. R., and J. D. Cure. 1994. Direct effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on plants and ecosystems: An updated bibliographic database. ORNL/CDIAC-70. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 7. LISTING OF FILES PROVIDED The database consists of seven files (see Table 1), including this documentation file. The data file (ndp072.dat and ndp072.wk1), reference file (refs.dat and refs.wk1), and comment file (comments.dat and comments.wk1) are each formatted in two ways: as flat ASCII files and as binary spreadsheet files (in Lotus 1-2-3 format, but readable by other spreadsheet programs). The 29-field ndp072.dat and ndp072.wk1 files contain data (784 observations in all) relevant for CO2-exposure meta-analysis for woody plants. The ndp072.dat file can be read into SAS or Fortran programs, using the access codes provided in Sect. 11 of this numeric data package. The ndp072.dat file can also be converted into a spreadsheet file for processing, although it is simpler to use the ndp072.wk1 spreadsheet file provided in this numeric data package. The refs.* files list the selected literature represented in the data files (84 references in all), and the comments.* files provide additional information about the studies, beyond what appears in the ndp072.* data files. The reference numbers in the refs.* and comments.* correspond to the paper numbers in the ndp072.* data files. Table 1. Data files in the database _____________________________________________________________________________________ File File name File size File type File description number (kB) _____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 ndp072.txt 81 ASCII text Documentation file 2 ndp072.dat 185 ASCII text Data file 3 ndp072.wk1 391 Binary spreadsheet Data file 4 refs.dat 18 ASCII text Reference file 5 refs.wk1 20 Binary spreadsheet Reference file 6 comments.dat 23 ASCII text Comment file 7 comments.wk1 24 Binary spreadsheet Comment file _____________________________________________________________________________________ 8. DESCRIPTION OF THE DOCUMENTATION FILE ndp072.txt (File 1) This file is an ASCII text equivalent to this document. 9. DESCRIPTION, FORMAT, AND PARTIAL LISTINGS OF THE ASCII DATA FILES ndp072.dat (File 2) Table 2 describes the format and contents of the ASCII data file ndp072.dat distributed with this numeric data package. This table also indicates the column in the corresponding spreadsheet file ndp072.wk1 in which each variable is found. Table 2. Contents and format of ndp072.dat (File 2) _____________________________________________________________________________________ Variable Variable Variable Starting Ending Units Spreadsheet Definition type width column column column and comments _____________________________________________________________________________________ OBSNO Numeric 3 1 3 A Observation number PAP_NO Numeric 4 4 7 See below B Cited paper numbers PARAM Character 6 8 13 See below C Measured parameter P_UNIT Character 15 14 28 D Unit for PARAM GENUS Character 13 29 41 E Plant genus name SPECIES Character 25 42 66 F Plant species name DIV1 Character 5 67 71 See below G Functional division #1 DIV2 Character 5 72 76 See below H Functional division #2 AMB Character 4 77 80 CO2_UNIT I Ambient CO2 treatment level ELEV Character 4 81 84 See J Elevated CO2 CO2_UNIT treatment level CO2_UNIT Character 8 85 92 See below K Units for CO2 exposure concentration TIME Numeric 4 93 96 Days L Maximum duration of CO2 exposure POT Character 6 97 102 See below M Growing method METHOD Character 4 103 106 See below N CO2-exposure facility STOCK Character 8 107 114 See below O Planting stock XTRT Character 6 115 120 See below P Interacting treatment LEVEL Character 7 121 127 See below Q Interacting treatment level QUANT Character 24 128 151 See below R Quantity and unit associated with LEVEL SOURCE Character 6 152 157 See below S Figure, table, or page from which data were taken X_AMB Numeric 10 158 167 See T Mean response P_UNIT of plants grown in ambient CO2 SE_AMB Numeric 9 168 176 See U Standard error P_UNIT of X_AMB SD_AMB Numeric 10 177 186 See V Standard P_UNIT deviation of responses of plants grown in ambient CO2 CV*_AMB Numeric 9 187 195 % W Coefficient of variation of responses of plants grown in ambient CO2 N_AMB Numeric 3 196 198 X Sample size of responses of plants grown in ambient CO2 X_ELEV Numeric 10 199 208 See Y Mean response P_UNIT of plants grown in elevated CO2 SE_ELEV Numeric 9 209 217 See Z Standard error P_UNIT of X_ELEV SD_ELEV Numeric 10 218 227 See AA Standard P_UNIT deviation of responses of plants grown in elevated CO2 CV*_ELEV Numeric 9 228 236 % AB Coefficient of variation of responses of plants grown in elevated CO2 N_ELEV Numeric 3 237 239 AC Sample size of responses of plants grown in elevated CO2 ______________________________________________________________________________________ Where: For PAP_NO, a value < 2000 indicates abstracts in Strain and Cure (1994), and a value >2000 indicates more recent literature. For PARAM, the following define the possible measured parameters: plant parts AGWT: total aboveground weight BD: basal diameter BGWT: total belowground weight CRWT: coarse root weight FRWT: fine root weight HT: height LFWT: total leaf weight RGR: relative growth rate SEEDWT: reproductive biomass STWT: stem weight TOTWT: whole plant weight leaf area components INDLA: maximum individual leaf area LAR: leaf area ratio (leaf area/unit mass of plant) MAXLA: maximum canopy leaf area SLA: specific leaf area (leaf area/unit mass of leaf) SLW: specific leaf weight (leaf mass/unit area of leaf) gas-exchange parameters GS: stomatal conductance of ambient plants measured under ambient CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured under elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) GS_AC: stomatal conductance of ambient plants measured at elevated CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured at elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) JMAX: maximum rate of electron transport PIRC: rate of phosphate regeneration PN: net CO2 assimilation of ambient plants measured under ambient CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured under elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) PN_AC: net CO2 assimilation of ambient plants measured at elevated CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured at elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) RD: dark respiration of ambient plants measured under ambient CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured under elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) RD_AC: dark respiration of ambient plants measured at elevated CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured at elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) VCMAX: maximum carboxylation rate of Rubisco WUE: water use efficiency of ambient plants measured under ambient CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured under elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) WUE_AC: water use efficiency of ambient plants measured at elevated CO2 (X_AMB) and elevated plants measured at elevated CO2 levels (X_ELEV) biochemical constituents LFC: leaf total C (unit mass basis) LFNA: leaf N (unit area basis) LFNM: leaf N (unit mass basis) LFTNC: leaf total non-structural carbohydrate LFP: leaf P (unit mass basis) LFSTAR: leaf starch (unit mass basis) LFSUG: leaf sugar (unit mass basis) TOTN: total N (concentration) The value of PARAM is linked to that shown for P_UNIT (parameter units), X_AMB (parameter value for plants grown under ambient CO2 exposure conditions), and X_ELEV (parameter value for plants grown under elevated CO2 exposure conditions). All entries for DIV1 are "WOODY" in this database. Entries for DIV2 are: ANGIO: angiosperms GYMNO: gymnosperms N2FIX: nitrogen fixation by species in experiment The values of AMB and ELEV are linked to that shown for CO2_UNIT. Entries for CO2_UNIT are: Pa (Pascals) ubar (1 ubar = 0.1 Pa) ppm ul/l cm3/m3 umol/mol For POT, a numeric entry signifies pot size (in liters) used during the major part of the experiment; the other entries are: GRND: plants rooted in the ground HYDRO: solution or aeroponic culture Entries for METHOD are: BRANCH: branch chambers GC: indoor, controlled environment: growth chambers GH: sunlit greenhouses and chambers within greenhouses OTC: field-based open-top chambers SPAR: high-tech soil-plant-atmosphere chambers Entries for STOCK are: BRANCH: branches exposed MATURE: mature plants exposed SAP: plants started from cuttings SEED: plants started from seeds Entries for XTRT are: NONE: no treatment COMP: plant competition FERT+L: soil fertility and light FERT: soil fertility H2O: well-watered vs drought LIGHT: light treatment TEMP: temperature treatment OZONE: ozone exposure UVB: ultraviolet-B radiation exposure The entries for LEVEL (which qualitatively describes the treatment level) are treatment- dependent and cannot be further categorized; this field is linked with XTRT (which characterizes the treatment type) and QUANT (which quantifies the treatment level). For XTRT = NONE, COMP, or FERT+L, LEVEL = . (missing value) (see entry for corresponding paper in comments.* file) For soil fertility treatment: FERT - HI LOW CONTROL missing (.) when treatment can not be clearly described (see entry for corresponding paper in comments.* file). For H2O treatment: DRT: drought WW: well-watered For LIGHT treatment: HI LOW For TEMP treatment: HI LOW CONTROL For stress interactions: OZONE HI LOW UVB HI LOW Entries for QUANT, which quantify the interacting treatment level, are treatment-dependent. The combination of quantity and unit is reported in this one field (see also the corresponding entry in comments.* file). The missing-value indicator for QUANT is a period (.). Possible entry formats for SOURCE are: F1a (Fig. 1a) T1 (Table 1) P235 (Page 235 of text) 1emeta (personal communication with authors) Entries for X_AMB, SE_AMB, SD_AMB, X_ELEV, SE_ELEV, and SD_ELEV are linked to the units given for P_UNIT. The suffix "AMB" refers to measurements of plants grown under ambient CO2 exposure conditions, and the suffix "ELEV" refers to measurements of plants grown under elevated CO2 exposure conditions. For CV*_AMB and CV*_ELEV, corrected (for small sample size) coefficient of variation was calculated according to Sokal and Rohlf (1981) as follows: CV* = (1 + 1/4N)(SD x 100)/X where SD = standard deviation, X = mean, and N = sample size. First two data records: 1 44PN umolCO2/m2/s ALNUS RUBRA WOODYN2FIX 350 650ul/l 46 0.5GC SEED FERT HI 20mgN/l T3 11.7700 0.6400 1.4311 12.7668 5 23.2000 4.6100 10.3083 46.6539 5 2 44PN umolCO2/m2/s ALNUS RUBRA WOODYN2FIX 350 650ul/l 46 0.5GC SEED FERT CONTROL. T3 11.7000 1.1600 2.5938 23.2777 5 25.9000 1.4800 3.3094 13.4165 5 Last two data records: 7832224TOTWT g POPULUS TREMULOIDES WOODYANGIO 385 642ul/l 60 6GC SEED NONE . . F1 69.7000 2.1000 3.6373 5.6534 3 102.6000 3.6000 6.2354 6.5838 3 7842224LFSTAR% POPULUS TREMULOIDES WOODYANGIO 385 642ul/l 60 6GC SEED NONE . . F2 2.7600 0.1900 0.3291 12.9176 3 8.5300 0.9300 1.6108 20.4576 3 refs.dat (File 4) This ASCII file provides citations of papers included in the database. A full listing of the file is included as APPENDIX B. comments.dat (File 6) This ASCII file provides experimental details from papers included in the database. A full listing of the file is included as APPENDIX C. 10. DESCRIPTION AND FORMAT OF THE LOTUS 1-2-3 BINARY SPREADSHEET FILES Three Lotus 1-2-3 binary spreadsheet files (files 3, 5, and 7) contain the same information as the corresponding *.dat ASCII files 2, 4, and 6. ndp072.wk1 (File 3) This Lotus 1-2-3 binary spreadsheet file corresponds to ASCII file ndp072.dat (File 2). Table 2, which describes the contents and format of ndp072.dat, also indicates the column of ndp072.wk1 in which each variable is found. refs.wk1 (File 5) This Lotus 1-2-3 binary spreadsheet file corresponds to ASCII file refs.dat (File 4). comments.wk1 (File 7) This Lotus 1-2-3 binary spreadsheet file corresponds to ASCII file comments.dat (File 6). 11. SAS AND FORTRAN CODES TO ACCESS THE DATA The following is SAS code to read file ndp072.dat *SAS data retrieval routine to read ndp072.dat; data ndp072; infile 'ndp072.dat'; input OBSNO 1-3 @4 PAP_NO 4. @8 PARAM $char6. P_UNIT $ 14-28 GENUS $ 29-41 SPECIES $ 42-66 DIV1 $ 67-71 DIV2 $ 72-76 AMB $ 77-80 ELEV $ 81-84 CO2_UNIT $ 85-92 TIME 93-96 POT $ 97-102 METHOD $ 103-106 STOCK $ 107-114 XTRT $ 115-120 LEVEL $ 121-127 QUANT $ 128-151 SOURCE $ 152-157 X_AMB 158-167 SE_AMB 168-176 SD_AMB 177-186 CV_AMB 187-195 N_AMB 196-198 X_ELEV 199-208 SE_ELEV 209-217 SD_ELEV 218-227 CV_ELEV 228-236 N_ELEV 237-239 ; * In the above INPUT statement, the variables CV*_AMB and CV*_ELEV have been renamed CV_AMB and CV_ELEV, respectively.; run; The following is Fortran code to read file ndp072.dat C *** Fortran program to read the file "ndp072.dat" C INTEGER OBSNO, PAP_NO, N_AMB, N_ELEV, TIME DOUBLE PRECISION X_ELEV, SD_ELEV REAL X_AMB, SE_AMB, SD_AMB, CV_AMB, SE_ELEV, CV_ELEV CHARACTER PARAM*6, P_UNIT*15, GENUS*13, SPECIES*25, DIV1*5, + DIV2*5, AMB*4, ELEV*4, CO2_UNIT*8, POT*6, METHOD*4, STOCK*8, + XTRT*6, LEVEL*7, QUANT*24, SOURCE*6 C OPEN (UNIT=1, FILE='NDP072.DAT') C C Note that the variables CV*_AMB and CV*_ELEV have C been renamed CV_AMB and CV_ELEV, respectively C 10 READ (1,100,END=99) OBSNO, PAP_NO, PARAM, P_UNIT, GENUS, SPECIES, + DIV1, DIV2, AMB, ELEV, CO2_UNIT, TIME, POT, METHOD, STOCK, XTRT, + LEVEL, QUANT, SOURCE, X_AMB, SE_AMB, SD_AMB,CV_AMB,N_AMB,X_ELEV, + SE_ELEV, SD_ELEV, CV_ELEV, N_ELEV 100 FORMAT (I3,I4,A6,A15,A13,A25,2A5,2A4,A8,A4,A6,A4,A8,A6,A7,A24, + A6,F9.4,1X,F8.4,1X,2(F9.4,1X),I2,3(F9.4,1X),F8.4,1X,I2) C GO TO 10 99 CLOSE (UNIT=1) STOP END APPENDIX A: SPECIES INCLUDED IN DATABASE Acacia mangium Acer pensylvanicum Acer pseudoplatanus Acer rubrum Acer saccharinum Acer saccharum Alnus glutinosa Alnus rubra Betula alleghaniensis Betula lenta Betula papyrifera Betula pendula Betula populifolia Betula pubescens Brachychiton populneum Castanea sativa Cecropia obtusifolia Cedrus atlantica Citrus aurantium Citrus sinensis Eucalyptus microtheca Eucalyptus polyanthemus Eucalyptus tetrodonta Fagus grandifolia Fagus sylvatica Ficus obtusifolia Fraxinus americana Garcinia mangostana Gliricidia sepium Lindera Benzoin Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Malus domestica Maranthes corymbosa Myriocarpa longipes Nothofagus fusca Picea abies Picea glauca Picea mariana Pinus banksiana Pinus echinata Pinus eldarica Pinus nigra Pinus ponderosa Pinus radiata Pinus strobus Pinus sylvestris Pinus taeda Piper auritum Poncirus trifoliata x citrusparadisi Poncirus trifoliata x citrussinensis Populus euramericana Populus grandidentata Populus interamericana Populus tremuloides Populus x euramericana Pseudotsuga menziesii Quercus alba Quercus prinus Quercus robur Quercus rubra Senna multijuga Tabebuia rosea Trichospermum mexicanum APPENDIX B: FULL LISTING OF REFS.DAT (FILE 4) The number at the beginning of each entry corresponds to PAP_NO, the cited paper number, as defined in Sect. 9. 44 Arnone, J.A., III, and J.C. Gordon. 1990. Effect of Nodulation, Nitrogen Fixation and CO2 Enrichment on the Physiology, Growth and Dry Mass Allocation of Seedlings of Alnus rubra Bong. New Phytologist 116:55-66. 2186 Bassow, S.L., K.D.M. McConnaughay, and F.A. Bazzaz. 1994. The Response of Temperate Tree Seedlings Grown in Elevated CO2 to Extreme Temperature Events. Ecological Applications 4(3):593-603. 2223 Bazzaz, F.A., and S.L. Miao. 1993. Successional Status, Seed Size,and Responses of Tree Seedlings to CO2, Light and Nutrients. Ecology 74(1):104-112. 2037 Bazzaz, F.A., S.L. Miao, and P.M. Wayne. 1993. CO2-induced Growth Enhancements of Co-occurring Tree Species Decline at Different Rates. Oecologia 96:478-482. 2217 Berryman, C.A., D. Eamus, and G.A. Duff. 1993. The Influence of CO2 Enrichment on Growth, Nutrient Content and Biomass Allocation of Maranthes corymbosa. Australian Journal of Botany 41:195-209. 112 Brown, K.R. 1991. Carbon Dioxide Enrichment Accelerates the Decline in Nutrient Status and Relative Growth Rate of Populus tremuloides Michx. Seedlings. Tree Physiology 8:161-173. 121 Bunce, J.A. 1992. Stomatal Conductance, Photosynthesis and Respiration of Temperate Deciduous Tree Seedlings Grown Outdoors at an Elevated Concentration of Carbon Dioxide. Plant, Cell and Environment 15:541-549. 2026 Callaway, R.M., E.H. DeLucia, E.M. Thomas, and W.H. Schlesinger. 1994. Compensatory Responses of CO2 Exchange and Biomass Allocation and their Effects on the Relative Growth Rate of Ponderosa Pine in Different CO2 and Temperature Regimes. Oecologia 98:159-166. 2043 Cipollini, M.L., B.G. Drake, and D. Whigham. 1993. Effects of ElevatedCO2 on Growth and Carbon/Nutrient Balance in the Deciduous Woody Shrub Lindera Benzoin (L.) Blume (Lauraceae). Oecologia 96:339-346. 150 Conroy, J.P., M. Kuppers, B. Kuppers, J. Virgona, and E.W.R. Barlow. 1988. The Influence of CO2 Enrichment, Phosphorus Deficiency and Water Stress on the Growth, Conductance and Water Use of Pinus radiata D. Don. Plant, Cell and Environment 11:91-98. 159 Couteaux, M.M., P. Bottner, H. Rouhier, and G. Billes. 1992. Atmospheric CO2 Increase and Plant Material Quality: Production, Nitrogen Allocation and Litter Decomposition of Sweet Chestnut. IN: Responses of Forest Ecosystems to Environmental Changes (A. Teller, P. Mathy, and J.N.R. Jeffers, eds.), Elsevier Applied Science, London, pp. 429-436. 168 Curtis, P.S., and J.A. Teeri. 1992. Seasonal Responses of Leaf Gas Exchange to Elevated Carbon Dioxide in Populus grandidentata. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 22:1320-1325. 2039 Curtis, P.S., C.S. Vogel, K.S. Pregitzer, D.R. Zak, and J.A. Teeri. 1995. Interacting Effects of Soil Fertility and Atmospheric CO2 on Leaf Area Growth and Carbon Gain Physiology in Populus x euramericana (Dode) Guinier. New Phytologist 129:253-263. 2129 Curtis, P.S., D.R. Zak, K.S. Pregitzer, and J.A. Teeri. 1994. Above- and Belowground Response of Populus grandidentata to Elevated Atmospheric CO2 and Soil N Availability. Plant and Soil 165:45-51. 184 Downton, W.J.S., W.J.R. Grant, and E.K. Chacko. 1990. Effect of Elevated Carbon Dioxide on the Photosynthesis and Early growth of Mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana L.). Scientia Horticulturae 44:215-225. 183 Downton, W.J.S., W.J.R. Grant, and B.R. Loveys. 1987. Carbon Dioxide Enrichment Increases Yield of Valencia Orange. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 14:493-501. 2047 Eamus, D., C.A. Berryman, and G.A. Duff. 1993. Assimilation, Stomatal Conductance, Specific Leaf Area and Chlorophyll Responses to Elevated CO2 of Maranthes corymbosa a Tropical Rain Forest Species. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 20:741-755. 2071 Eamus, D., C.A. Berryman, and G.A. Duff. 1995. The Impact of CO2 Enrichment on Water Relations in Maranthes corymbosa and Eucalyptus tetrodonta. Australian Journal of Botany 43:273-282. 2070 Eamus, D., G.A. Duff, and C.A. Berryman. 1995. Photosynthetic Responses to Temperature, Light, Flux-density, CO2 Concentration and Vapour Pressure Deficit in Eucalyptus tetrodonta Grown under CO2 Enrichment. Environmental Pollution 90:41-49. 208 El Kohen, A., J.-Y. Pontailler, and M. Mousseau. 1991. Effect of Doubling of Atmospheric CO2 Concentration on Dark Respiration in Aerial Parts of Young Chestnut Trees (Castanea sativa Mill.). Comptes Rendus des Sciences (Paris) t. 312, Serie III:477-481. 209 El Kohen, A., H. Rouhier, and M. Mousseau. 1992. Changes in Dry Weight and Nitrogen Partitioning Induced by Elevated CO2 Depends on Soil Nutrient Availability in Sweet Chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.). Annales des Sciences Forestieres 49:83-90. 210 El Kohen, A., L. Venet, and M. Mousseau. 1993. Growth and Photosynthesis of Two Deciduous Forest Species at Elevated Carbon Dioxide. Functional Ecology 7:480-486. 221 Ferguson, J.J., W.T. Avigne, L.H. Allen, and K.E. Koch. 1986. Growth of CO2-enriched Sour Orange Seedlings Treated with Gibberellins/Cytokinins. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 99:37-39. 222 Fetcher, N., C.H. Jaeger, B.R. Strain, and N. Sionit. 1988. Long-term Elevation of Atmospheric CO2 Concentration and the Carbon Exchange Rates of Saplings of Pinus taeda L. and Liquidambar styraciflua L. Tree Physiology 4:255-262. 2041 Garcia, R.L., S.B. Idso, G.W. Wall, and B.A. Kimball. 1994. Changes in net Photosynthesis and Growth of Pinus eldarica Seedlings in Response to Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment. Plant, Cell and Environment 17:971-978. 233 Gaudillere, J.-P., and M. Mousseau. 1989. Short Term Effect of CO2 Enrichment on Leaf Development and Gas Exchange of Young Poplars (Populus euramericana cv I 214). Acta Oecologica/Oecologia Plantarum 10:95-105. 2002 Gorissen, A., P.J. Kuikman, and H. van de Beek. 1995. Carbon Allocation and water Use in Juvenile Douglas Fir under Elevated CO2. New Phytologist 129:275-282. 2036 Grulke, N.E., J.L. Hom, and S.W. Roberts. 1993. Physiological Adjustment of two Full-sib Families of Ponderosa Pine to Elevated CO2. Tree Physiology 12:391-401. 2035 Gunderson, C.A., R.J. Norby, and S.D. Wullschleger. 1993. Foliar Gas Exchange Responses of two Deciduous Hardwoods during 3 Years of Growth in Elevated CO2: no Loss of Photosynthetic Enhancement. Plant, Cell and Environment 16:797-807. 290 Hollinger, D.Y. 1987. Gas Exchange and Dry Matter Allocation Responses to Elevation of Atmospheric CO2 Concentration in Seedlings of three Tree Species. Tree Physiology 3:193-202. 314 Idso, S.B., and B.A. Kimball. 1991. Downward Regulation of Photosynthesis and Growth at High CO2 Levels. Plant Physiology 96:990-992. 318 Idso, S.B., and B.A. Kimball. 1993. Effects of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on Net Photosynthesis and Dark Respiration Rates of Three AustralianTree Species. Journal of Plant Physiology 141:166-171. 313 Idso, S.B., B.A. Kimball, and S.G. Allen. 1991. CO2 Enrichment of Sour Orange Trees: 2.5 Years into a Long-term Experiment. Plant, Cell and Environment 14:351-353. 322 Idso, S.B., B.A. Kimball, and S.G. Allen. 1991. Net Photosynthesis of Sour Orange Trees Maintained in Atmospheres of Ambient and Elevated CO2 Concentration. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 54:95-101. 2123 Jarvis, P.G., H.S.J. Lee, and C.V.M. Barton. 1994. The Likely Impact of rising CO2 and Temperature on European Forests. Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh. 2045 Johnsen, K.H. 1993. Growth and Ecophysiological Responses of Black Spruce Seedlings to Elevated CO2 under Varied Water and Nutrient Additions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 23:1033-1042. 2109 Johnson, D., D. Geisinger, R. Walker, J. Newman, J. Vose, K. Elliot, and T. Ball. 1994. Soil pCO2, Soil Respiration, and Root Activity in CO2-fumigated and Nitrogen-fertilized Pondersosa Pine. Plant and Soil 165:129-138. 340 Kaushal, P., J.M. Guehl, and G. Aussenac. 1989. Differential Growth Response to Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Enrichment in Seedlings of Cedrus atlantica and Pinus nigra ssp. Laricio var. Corsicana. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 19:1351-1358. 362 Koch, K.E., P. Jones, W.T. Avigne, and L.H. Allen Jr. 1986. Growth, Dry Matter Partitioning, and Diurnal Activities of RuBP Carboxylase in Citrus Seedlings Maintained at Two Levels of CO2. Physiologia Plantarum 67:477-484. 2121 Kubiske, M.E., and K.S. Pregitzer. 1994. Effect of Elevated CO2 and Light Availability on the Photosynthetic Light Response of Trees of Contrasting Shade Tolerance. Tree Physiology; in press. 2120 Laboratorium Voor Plantecologie. 1992. Effect of Increased Atmospheric CO2 Concentration on Primary Productivity and Carbon Allocation in Typical Belgian Forest Ecosystems. Progress report 1992. 2028 Lavola, A., and R. Julkunen-Tiitto. 1994. The Effect of Elevated Carbon Dioxide and Fertilization on Primary and Secondary Metabolites in Birch, Betula pendula (Roth). Oecologia 99:315-321. 2165 Lewis, J.D., R.B. THomas, and B.R. Strain. 1994. Effect of Elevated CO2 on Mycorrhizal Colonization of Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda L.) Seedlings. Plant and Soil 165:81-88. 2224 Lindroth, R.L., K.K. Kinney, and C.L. Platz. 1993. Responses of Deciduous Trees to Elevated Atmospheric CO2: Productivity, Phytochemistry, and Insect Performance. Ecology 74(3):763-777. 2065 Liu, S., and R.O. Teskey. 1995. Responses of Foliar Gas Exchange to Long-term Elevated CO2 Concentrations in Mature Loblolly Pine Trees. Tree Physiology 15:351-359. 2069 Marek, M.V., J. Kalina, and M. Matouskova. 1995. Response of Photosynthetic Carbon Assimilation of Norway Spruce Exposed to Long-term Elevation of CO2 Concentration. Photosynthetica 31:209-220. 2117 Mortensen, L.M. 1994. Effects of Carbon Dioxide Concentration on Assimilate Partitioning, Photosynthesis and Transpiration of Betula pendula Roth. and Picea abies (L.) Karst. Seedlings at two Temperatures. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B, Soil and Plant Sciences 44:164-169. 2003 Mortensen, L.M. 1995. Effect of Carbon Dioxide Concentration on Biomass Production and Partitioning in (Betula pubescens Ehrh.) Seedlings at Different Ozone and Temperature Regimes. Environmental Pollution 87:337-343. 468 Mousseau, M. 1993. Effects of Elevated CO2 on Growth, Photosynthesis and Respiration of Sweet Chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.). Vegetatio 104/105:413-419. 470 Mousseau, M., and H.Z. Enoch. 1989. Carbon Dioxide Enrichment Reduces Shoot Growth in Sweet Chestnut Seedlings (Castanea sativa Mill.). Plant, Cell and Environment 12:927-934. 502 Norby, R.J., C.A. Gunderson, S.D. Wullschleger, E.G. O'Neill, and M.K. McCracken. 1992. Productivity and Compensatory Responses of Yellow-poplar Trees in Elevated CO2. Nature 357:322-324. 505 Norby, R.J., and E.G. O'Neill. 1989. Growth Dynamics and Water Use of Seedlings of Quercus alba L. in CO2-enriched Atmospheres. New Phytologist 111:491-500. 506 Norby, R.J., and E.G. O'Neill. 1991. Leaf Area Compensation and Nutrient Interactions in CO2-enriched Seedlings of Yellow-poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera L.). New Phytologist 117:515-528. 503 Norby, R.J., E.G. O'Neill, W.G. Hood, and R.J. Luxmoore. 1987. Carbon Allocation, Root Exudation and Mycorrhizal Colonization of Pinus echinata Seedlings Grown under CO2 Enrichment. Tree Physiology 3:203-210. 504 Norby, R.J., E.G. O'Neill, and R.J. Luxmoore. 1986. Effects of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on the Growth and Mineral Nutrition of Quercus alba Seedlings in Nutrient-poor Soil. Plant Physiology 82:83-89. 2131 Norby, R.J., Wullschleger, and C.A. Gunderson. 1996. Tree Responses to Elevated CO2 and Implications for Forests. IN: Carbon Dioxide and Terrestrial Ecosystems (G.W. Koch and H.A. Mooney, eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp.1-21. 510 O'Neill, E.G., R.J. Luxmoore, and R.J. Norby. 1987. Increases in Mycorrhizal Colonization and Seedling Growth in Pinus echinata and Quercus alba in an Enriched CO2 Atmosphere. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 17:878-883. 521 Overdieck, D. 1990. Effects of Elevated CO2-concentration Levels on Nutrient Contents of Herbaceous and Woody Plants. IN: The Greenhouse Effect and Primary Productivity in European Agro-ecosystems; 5-10 April 1990; Wageningen, The Netherlands (J. Goudriaan, H. van Keulen, and H.H. van Laar, eds.), Pudoc, Wageningen, pp. 31-37. 550 Pettersson, R., and A.J.S. McDonald. 1992. Effects of Elevated Carbon Dioxide Concentration on Photosynthesis and Growth of Small Birch Plants (Betula pendula Roth.) at Optimal Nutrition. Plant, Cell and Environment 15:911-919. 2027 Pettersson, R., A.J.S. McDonald, and I. Stadenberg. 1993. Response of Small Birch Plants (Betula pendula Roth.) to Elevated CO2 and Nitrogen Supply. Plant, Cell and Environment 16:1115-1121. 553 Polle, A., T. Pfirrmann, S. Chakrabarti, and H. Rennenberg. 1993. The Effects of Enhanced Ozone and Enhanced Carbon Dioxide Concentrations on Biomass, Pigments and Antioxidative Enzymes in Spruce Seedlings. Plant, Cell and Environment 16:311-316. 2110 Pregitzer, K.S., D.R. Zak, P.S. Curtis, M.E. Kubiske, J.A. Teeri, and C.S. Vogel. 1995. Atmospheric CO2, Soil Nitrogen and Turnover of Fine Roots. New Phytologist 129(4):579-585. 582 Reekie, E.G., and F.A. Bazzaz. 1989. Competition and Patterns of Resource Use among Seedlings of Five Tropical Trees Grown at Ambient and Elevated CO2. Oecologia 79:212-222. 2046 Reid, C.D., and B.R. Strain. 1994. Effects of CO2 Enrichment on Whole-plant Carbon Budget of Seedlings of Fagus grandifolia and Acer saccharum in low Irradiance. Oecologia 98:31-39. 596 Rochefort, L., and F.A. Bazzaz. 1992. Growth Response to Elevated CO2 in Seedlings of Four Co-occurring Birch Species. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 22:1583-1587. 2038 Roth, S.K., and R.L. Lindroth. 1994. Effects of CO2-mediated Changes in Paper Birch and White Pine Chemistry on Gypsy Moth Performance. Oecologia 98:133-138. 644 Sharkey, T.D., F. Loreto, and C.F. Delwiche. 1991. High Carbon Dioxide and Sun/Shade Effects on Isoprene Emission from Oak and Aspen Tree Leaves. Plant, Cell and Environment 14:333-338. 655 Sionit, N., B.R. Strain, H. Hellmers, G.H. Riechers, and C.H. Jaeger. 1985. Long-term Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment Affects the Growth and Development of Liquidambar styraciflua and Pinus taeda Seedlings. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 15:468-471. 666 Stewart, J.D., and J. Hoddinott. 1993. Photosynthetic Acclimation to Elevated Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and UV Irradiation in Pinus banksiana. Physiologia Plantarum 88:493-500. 2042 Sullivan, J.H., and A.H. Teramura. 1994. The Effects of UV-B Radiation on Loblolly Pine. 3. Interaction with CO2 Enhancement. Plant, Cell and Environment 17:311-317. 676 Surano, K.A., P.F. Daley, J.L.J. Houpis, J.H. Shinn, J.A. Helms, R.J. Palassou, and M.P. Costella. 1986. Growth and Physiological Responses of Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex P. Laws. to Long-term Elevated CO2 Concentration. Tree Physiology 2:243-259. 2005 Teskey, R.O. 1995. A Field Study of the Effects of Elevated CO2 on Carbon Assimilation, Stomatal Conductance and Leaf Branch Growth of Pinus taeda Trees. Plant, Cell and Environment 18:565-573. 682 Thomas, R.B., D.D. Richter, H. Ye, P.R. Heine, and B.R. Strain. 1991.Nitrogen Dynamics and Growth of Seedlings of an N-fixing Tree (Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp.) Exposed to Elevated Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Oecologia 88:415-421. 2044 Tissue, D.T., R.B. Thomas, and B.R. Strain. 1993. Long-term Effects of Elevated CO2 and Nutrients on Photosynthesis and Rubisco in Loblolly Pine Seedlings. Plant, Cell and Environment 16:859-865. 2032 Tschaplinski, T.J., R.J. Norby, and S.D. Wullschleger. 1993. Responses of Loblolly Pine Seedlings to Elevated CO2 and Fluctuating Water Supply. Tree Physiology 13:283-296. 2122 Vogel, C.S., and P.S. Curtis. 1995. Leaf Gas Exchange and Nitrogen Dynamics of N2-fixing, Field-grown Alnus glutinosa under Elevated Atmospheric CO2. Global Change Biology 1:55-61. 2068 Wang, K., S. Kellomaki, and K. Laitinen. 1995. Effects of Needle Age, Long-term Temperature and CO2 Treatments on the Photosynthesis of Scots Pine. Tree Physiology 15:211-218. 2152 Williams, R.S., D.E. Lincoln, and R.B. Thomas. 1994. Loblolly Pine Grown under Elevated CO2 Affects Early Instar Pine Sawfly Performance. Oecologia 98:64-71. 747 Wullschleger, S.D., and R.J. Norby. 1992. Respiratory Cost of Leaf Growth and Maintenance in White Oak Saplings Exposed to Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 22:1717-1721. 746 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and C.A. Gunderson. 1992. Growth and Maintenance Respiration in Leaves of Liriodendron tulipifera L. Exposed to Long-term Carbon Dioxide Enrichment in the Field. New Phytologist 21:515-523. 2004 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and P.J. Hanson. 1995. Growth and Maintenance Respiration in Stems of Quercus alba after Four Years of CO2 Enrichment. Physiologia Plantarum 93:47-54. 7J45 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and D.L. Hendrix. 1992. Carbon Exchange Rates, Chlorophyll Content, and Carbohydrate Status of Two Forest Tree Species Exposed to Carbon Dioxide Enrichment. Tree Physiology 10:21-31. 2048 Yakimchuk, R., and J. Hoddinott. 1994. The Influence of Ultraviolet-B Light and Carbon Dioxide Enrichment on the Growth and Physiology of Seedlings of Three Conifer Species. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 24:1-8. 756 Ziska, L.H., K.P. Hogan, A.P. Smith, and B.G. Drake. 1991. Growth and Photosynthetic Response of Nine Tropical Species with Long-term Exposure to Elevated Carbon Dioxide. Oecologia 86:383-389. APPENDIX C: FULL LISTING OF COMMENTS.DAT (FILE 6) The number at the beginning of each entry corresponds to PAP_NO, the cited paper number, as defined in Sect. 9. Listed are paper numbers, authors, CO2 exposure facility, light, temperature, watering and nutrient conditions when available, location of experimental set-up, and comments. For the CO2 exposure facilities, watering regimes, and locations the following distinctions were made: CO2-exposure facilities: BRANCH - branch chambers GC - indoor, controlled environment: growth chambers GH - sunlit greenhouses and chambers within greenhouses OTC - field-based open-top chambers SPAR - high tech soil-plant-atmosphere chambers Watering regime: WW - well watered W - watered Locations: NA - North America CA - Central America AU - Australia EU - Europe ============================================================================== 44 Arnone, J.A., III, and J.C. Gordon, 1990 GC Light: 400 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 16h Temperature: 26/20degC Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 70% Nutrients: daily 1/4 strength Hoagland N Treatment: 0 vs 20 mg NH4NO3-N/l NA: North Carolina Root nodules from inocculation with Frankia cells 112 Brown, K.R., 1991 GC Light: 400 umol/m2/s at canopy level Photoperiod: 18h Temperature: 22/17degC Watering regime: WW 6 d/wk Humidity: 45% Macronutrients 6d/wk; N Treatment: 0.155 vs 15.5 mM NH4NO3-N NA: Canada: Alberta SE estimated from confidence interval 121 Bunce, J.A., 1992 GH Light: 27-49 mol/m2/d Temperature: 30-19degC Watering regime: WW 2e or 3e day fertile sandy loam+fertilizer/3 wks NA: Maryland SE and SD pers. comm. 150 Conroy, J.P., M. Kuppers, B. Kuppers, J. Virgona, and E.W.R. Barlow, 1988 GC Light: 450 umol/m2/s at top of plants Photoperiod: 16h Temperature: 25/18degC Watering regime: daily water nutrients added; P treatment: P levels at 4.4 vs 40 mg/pot AU P-deficient needles of 0.7-0.8 mgP/gdrywt or 1-1.5 mgP/gdrywt 159 Couteaux, M.M., P. Bottner, H. Rouhier, and G. Billes, 1992 GC soil with micro flora, fauna and litter EU: S France Se assumed 168 Curtis, P.S., and J.A. Teeri, 1992 OTC Temperature: local+1.5/1/2degC Watering regime: Precip+W available N: 2.7ug/g soil NA: N-Michigan 183 Downton, W.J.S., W.J.R. Grant, and B.R. Loveys, 1987 GH Light: 600-350 umol/m2/s: top of plants-pot level Photoperiod: 10h Temperature: 25/18degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 60-90% 1/2 strength Hoagland 2*wk AU fruit dry wt 184 Downton, W.J.S., W.J.R. Grant, and E.K. Chacko, 1990 GC Light: 450 umol/m2/s initially Photoperiod: 14-12h Temperature: 30/22degC Watering regime: WW daily Humidity: 50% Oscomote each 3-4mo AU 208 El Kohen, A., J.-Y. Pontailler, and M. Mousseau, 1991 OTC EU: France 209 El Kohen, A., H. Rouhier, and M. Mousseau, 1992 GH Watering regime: WW/drip NPK Treatment: 0 NPK vs 0.82g N, 0.78gP, 0.4gK/month EU: France 210 El Kohen, A., L. Venet, and M. Mousseau, 1993 GH Temperature: local+-1.8degC Watering regime: W daily EU: France N(#) Castanea from total # plants Castanea; from Fagus from F4 221 Ferguson, J.J., W.T. Avigne, L.H. Allen, and K.E. Koch, 1986 GH Light: 85% from outside Temperature: 31/23degC Watering regime: WW nutrients added: NPK 20:20:20; Peter's NA: Florida part of gibberellin and cytokinin treatment experiment 222 Fetcher, N., C.H. Jaeger, B.R. Strain, and N. Sionit, 1988 GH Light: 1900 umol/m2/s for gas exchange measurements Temperature controlled for 30yr average NA: N Carolina N(#) for stomatal conductance assumed same as for assimilation rate 233 Gaudillere, J.-P., and M. Mousseau, 1989 GC Light: 250 umol/m2/s at top of canopy Photoperiod: 16h Temperature: 22/15degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 50% EU: France 290 Hollinger, D.Y., 1987 GC Light: 700 umol/m2/s at top of canopy Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 20/10degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 70/90% AU SE of mass estimated 313 Idso, S.B., B.A. Kimball, and S.G. Allen, 1991 OTC Watering regime: WW nutrients added NA: Arizona 314 Idso, S.B., and B.A. Kimball, 1991 OTC Watering regime: WW nutrients added NA: Arizona SD of mass estimated from area of F1 318 Idso, S.B., and B.A. Kimball, 1993 OTC Watering regime: WW nutrients added NA: Arizona Assimilation rate and N(#) estimated from F3 322 Idso, S.B., B.A. Kimball, and S.G. Allen, 1991 OTC Watering regime: WW nutrients added NA: Arizona 340 Kaushal, P., J.M. Guehl, and G. Aussenac, 1989 GH Light: 80% of natural outside light+160umol/m2/s at shoot level 6h/d Temperature: local:10-23degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 80-90% EU: France SE/SD pers comm. 362 Koch, K.E., P. Jones, W.T. Avigne, and L.H. Allen Jr., 1986 GC Light: 85% of incident light of outside Temperature: 31/23degC Watering regime: WW nutrients added (Peter's) NA: Florida SE/SD pers comm 468 Mousseau, M., 1993 OTC Temperature: 35-10/22-5degC Watering regime: WW nutrients added EU: France N(#) of mass assumed as in T1 pap 471 470 Mousseau, M., and H.Z. Enoch, 1989 OTC Temperature: local+max4degC Watering regime: WW/drip nutrients added/yr EU: France 502 Norby, R.J., C.A. Gunderson, S.D. Wullschleger, E.G. O'Neill, and M.K. McCracken, 1992 OTC soils potentially NP deficient NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW note on drought and nutrient deficiency 503 Norby, R.J., E.G. O'Neill, W.G. Hood, and R.J. Luxmoore, 1987 GC Light: 540 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 25/7degC Watering regime: W Humidity: 65% soils potentially NP deficient NA: Tennessee potential soil nutrient deficient 504 Norby, R.J., E.G. O'Neill, and R.J. Luxmoore, 1986 GC Light: 660 umol/m2/s at top of canopy Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 25/15degC Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 65% soils potentially NP deficient NA: Tennessee SE/SD for F1,T1,T2: e-mail; soil potentially nutrient deficient 505 Norby, R.J., and E.G. O'Neill, 1989 GH Light: 580 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 26/10degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 65/95% NPK treatment: 0 NPK vs 5,1.5,1.9mg N,P,K/pot/wk NA: Tennessee SE/SD: e-mail 506 Norby, R.J., and E.G. O'Neill,1991 GC Light: 600 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 26/12deg Watering regime: WW Humidity: 70/90% nutrients: 20.0.4.5,16.5 mg NPK+/wk ; later 2*wk NA: Tennessee N(#) from author 510 O'Neill, E.G., R.J. Luxmoore, and R.J. Norby, 1987 GC Light: 450 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 26/10degC Watering regime: WW no nutrients added NA: Tennessee 521 Overdieck, D., 1990 GC Watering regime: W as precip soils of average fertility EU: Germany: 52degN 8degE 550 Pettersson, R., and A.J.S. McDonald, 1992 GC Light: 600 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 18h Temperature: 20degC hydroponics Humidity: 45% nutrient solution EU: Sweden N(#) 2-5: pers comm for gas exchange; as T1 for other measures 553 Polle, A., T. Pfirrmann, S. Chakrabarti, and H. Rennenberg, 1993 GC controlled as for local environment Watering regime: WW:drip acidic mists Ozone Treatment: 0.02 vs 0.08 cm3/m3: 24hrs/d like higher elevations EU: Germany:Bavaria 582 Reekie, E.G., and F.A. Bazzaz, 1989 GH Light: local with 1000-1200 umol/m2/s max levels Temperature: local 30/27degC Watering regime: WW monthly Peter's fertilization(20:20:20) Plant competition of tropical plants NA: Massachusetts 596 Rochefort, L., and F.A. Bazzaz, 1992 GH Light: 900 umol/m2/s clear days Temperature: 28/20degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 73% nutrients added each 2 weeks NA: Massachusetts 644 Sharkey, T.D., F. Loreto, and C.F. Delwiche, 1991 GH Light: 300-500 umol/m2/s (gas measurements at 900 umol/m2/s) Photoperiod: 15h Temperature: 25/20degC Humidity: 70%/85% NA: Wisconsin Partly a shading and isoprene emission experiment 655 Sionit, N., B.R. Strain, H. Hellmers, G.H. Riechers, and C.H. Jaeger, 1985 GH Temperature: night temp controlled Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 70% nutrients (Hoagland 1/15 strength daily NA: North Carolina 666 Stewart, J.D., and J. Hoddinott, 1993 GH Light: 600 umol/m2/s as maximum Photoperiod: 18h Temperature: 15-32degC (local) Watering regime: WW:2*wk nutrients 1/wk UVB Treatment: 0.005-0.03 vs 0.25-0.90 W/m2 NA: Canada: Alberta 676 Surano, K.A., P.F. Daley, J.L.J. Houpis, J.H. Shinn, J.A. Helms, R.J. Palassou, and M.P. Costella, 1986 OTC Light: 80-90% from outside Temperature: local+upto5degC Watering regime: WW:3*wk+ Humidity: down to 10% nutrients added/month: NPK + 2.2,1.8,1.3 g/pot/month NA: California 682 Thomas, R.B., D.D. Richter, H. Ye, P.R. Heine, and B.R. Strain, 1991i GC Light: 1000 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 29/23degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 70% nutrients added daily with/without N N Treatment: 0 vs 7.0 mM NH4NO3-N NA: South Carolina Seeds inocculated with Rhizobium 745 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and D.L. Hendrix, 1992 OTC gas exchange measures at 1300 umol/m2/s NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW Precip 169 cm at study site compared to 139 cm as 30 yr average 746 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and C.A. Gunderson, 1992 OTC NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW 747 Wullschleger, S.D., and R.J. Norby, 1992 OTC NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW 756 Ziska, L.H., K.P. Hogan, A.P. Smith, and B.G. Drake, 1991 OTC Light: 740 umol/m2/s average; 1200umol/m2/s max Photoperiod: 10h Temperature: 36.5/21.2degC Watering regime: WW 2*day Humidity: 60%/85% nutrients added (Osmocote) CA: 83.9degN 9.2degW Values differ slightly from Table: pers comm 2002 Gorissen, A., P.J. Kuikman, and H. Van De Beek, 1995 GC Light: 400 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 16h Temperature: 18/14degC Watering regime: W Humidity: 70-80% EU: 52.2degN 5.8degE 2003 Mortensen, L.M., 1995 GC Light: 18 mol/m2/day for temp treatment Light: 22 mol/m2/day for Ozone treatment Photoperiod: 24h Temperature: 17.3degC=control Watering regime: WW nutrients added 2 Treatments: Ozone: 7 vs 62 nmol/mol for 8 hrs Temperature: 15.3 vs 20 degC EU: 60.8degN 11.5degE 2004 Wullschleger, S.D., R.J. Norby, and P.J. Hanson, 1995 OTC NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW Pisolithus tinctorius mycorrhizal inoculum; stem respiration 2005 Teskey, R.O., 1995 BRANCH Light: 1200 umol/m2/s for gas exchange measurements Watering regime: irrigated NA: Georgia: 33.9degN 82.3degW 2026 Callaway, R.M., E.H. DeLucia, E.M. Thomas, and W.H. Schlesinger, 1994 GC Light: 1000 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 12h Temperature Treatment: 25/10degC vs 30/25degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 45%i during day nutrients 1/2 strength Hoagland NA: Nevada 2027 Pettersson, R., A.J.S. McDonald, and I. Stadenberg, 1993 GC Light: 600 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 18h Temperature: 20degC Hydroponic Humidity: 50% nutrient solution N Treatment: 0.07 vs 0.15 molN/molN/d EU: Sweden 2028 Lavola, A., and R. Julkunen-Tiitto, 1994 GH Light: local -- 1137-175 umol/m2/s Temperature: 22/15degC NKP Treatment: 0 vs 500 kg/ha EU: Finland 2032 Tschaplinski, T.J., R.J. Norby, and S.D. Wullschleger, 1993 GC Light: 720 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 14h Temperature: 26/16degC H2O Treatment: weekly vs biweekly watering Humidity: 85-90% fertilized/month (Peter's NPK 20:20:20) NA: Tennessee 2035 Gunderson, C.A., R.J. Norby, and S.D. Wullschleger, 1993 OTC Light: 1100-2300 umol/m2/s for gas exchange measurements Temperature: local Watering regime: precip NA: 35.9degN 84.4degW 2036 Grulke, N.E., J.L. Hom, and S.W. Roberts, 1993 GC Light: 713 umol/m2/s at canopy height Photoperiod: 12hr later 14h Temperature: 25/19degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 46-57%/81% fertilized weekly NA: California 2037 Bazzaz, F.A., S.L. Miao, and P.M. Wayne, 1993 GH Light: 37% and 75 % of full sun Temperature: 30/23degC 2 Treatments: Light: 37% and 75% of full sun Fertilizer: 0.18 and 1.8 g Oscomote NA: Massachusetts 2038 Roth, S.K., and R.L. Lindroth, 1994 GC Light: 501 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 15h Temperature: 25/20degC Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 70/85% fertilized 1/2 strength Hoagland 2*per day NA: Wisconsin 2039 Curtis, P.S., C.S. Vogel, K.S. Pregitzer, D.R. Zak, and J.A. Teeri, 1995 OTC Light: gas exchange measures at 1800 umol/m2/s Temperature: local Watering regime: WW Soil Treatment: 45 vs 346 ug N/g/d N mineralization in soils 64 vs 110 mg extractable PO4/kg soil NA: N-Michigan 2041 Garcia, R.L., S.B. Idso, G.W. Wall, and B.A. Kimball, 1994 OTC Watering regime: WW fertilized NA: Arizona 2042 Sullivan, J.H., and A.H. Teramura, 1994 GH Light: ~80-85% of outdoors Temperature: 27/23degC Watering regime: WW/daily fertilized 1/2 strength Hoagland UVB Treatment: 8 hrs daily 8.8 vs 13.8 kJ/m2 NA: Maryland SE for T1 SE for F1 (e-mail) 2043 Cipollini, M.L., B.G. Drake, and D. Whigham, 1993 OTC Light: 10-100-occasionally 1000 umol/m2/min NA: Maryland 2044 Tissue, D.T., R.B. Thomas, and B.R. Strain, 1993 OTC Watering regime: precip 1/2 strength Hoagland 2*week 2 Treatments: High NP:7mol/m2 NH4NO3+1mol/m3 PO4; low P:same N+0.2mol/m3P; lowN:1mol/m3NH4NO3+1mol/m3PO4 NA: North Carolina N(#) in T1 does not match text 2045 Johnsen, K.H., 1993 GC Light: 450 umol/m2/s at bench height Photoperiod: 19h Temperature: 20/15degC watering treatment Humidity: 70/90% treatment within 1/3 strength Ingestad 2 Treatments: WW vs drought cycles (fertilized with 8 mL 300 ppmN: Ingestad); Fertilization: 6 mL/wk then 12 mL after 71 days vs 12mL, 18 mL, 24 mL, 32 mL after day 1, 42, 71 and 104 NA: Canada: Ontario 2046 Reid, C.D., and B.R. Strain, 1994 GC Light: 65 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 12h Temperature: 19/15degC Watering regime: WW daily 1/4 strength Hoagland NA: North Carolina 2047 Eamus, D., C.A. Berryman, and G.A. Duff, 1993 OTC Light: ambient local Temperature: local-up to 1.5degC AU 2048 Yakimchuk, R., and J. Hoddinott, 1994 GC Light: 150 umol/m2/s+2hrs 40 umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 18h Temperature: 20/18degC Watering regime: WW Humidity: 65% fertilized weekly Ozone treatment: 1.1 uW/cm2 vs 150 uW/cm2 8hrs/day NA: Canada: Alberta potsize: pers. com. 2065 Liu, S., and R.O. Teskey, 1995 BRANCH Light: gas exchange at 1000-2000 umol/m2/s Temperature: 16.5degC Watering regime: W+precip low to medium soil fertility NA: 33.9degN 83.3degW mature trees, low fertility site 2068 Wang, K., S. Kellomaki, and K. Laitinen, 1995 OTC Temperature treatment: ambient vs hot=amb+2degC in summer,amb+5-20degC Watering regime: W+precip sandy soil EU: 62.8degN 30.9degE chamber around coniferous saplings; elevated CO2 only during daytime 2069 Marek, M.V., J. Kalina, and M. Matouskova, 1995 OTC native Coniferous EU: 49.5degN 18.5degW native coniferous; elevated CO2 level is saturating level 2070 Eamus, D., G.A. Duff, and C.A. Berryman, 1995 SPAR Light: 68% of full Temperature: local minus upto 3degC Watering regime: WW/drip Osmocote in soils AU 2071 Eamus, D., C.A. Berryman, and G.A. Duff, 1995 SPAR Light: 66% of full Temperature: local minus upto 3degC Watering regime: WW 2*day fertilized each 2 weeks AU 2109 Johnson, D., D. Geisinger, R. Walker, J. Newman, J. Vose, K. Elliot, and T. Ball, 1994 OTC Watering regime: WW N treatment: 0 vs 20 g/m2/yr ammonium sulfate NA: California SE vs SD estimates F5; chamber description in Ball et al (1992) 2110 Pregitzer, K.S., D.R. Zak, P.S. Curtis, M.E. Kubiske, J.A. Teeri, and C.S. Vogel, 1995 OTC Watering regime: WW Soil treatment: 45 vs 348 ug N/g/d N mineralization in soils; 64 vs 110 mg extractable PO4/kg soil NA: N-Michigan 2117 Mortensen, L.M., 1994 GC Light treatment: 15 mol/m2/d then 22 mol/m2/d for birch, 21 mol/m2/d for spruce Photoperiod: 24h Temperature Treatment: 15.3 vs 20.0 degC Watering regime: WW 600 vs 1000 Pa as wvpd at 15.3 vs 20degC fertilized, see Mortensen, 1994 EU: Norway 2120 Laboratorium Voor Plantecologie 1992 GC Light: 270umol/m2/s Photoperiod: 16h Temperature: 22/17.5degC Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 65% fertilized at optimal levels EU: Belgium 2121 Kubiske, M.E., and K.S. Pregitzer, 1994 OTC Light Treatment: low and high; understory imitation NA: N-Michigan 2122 Vogel, C.S., and P.S. Curtis, 1995 OTC Temperature: local+2.6degC fertilized with 4.5 g/m2 N NA: 45.6degN 84.7degW nodule inoculations 2123 Jarvis, P.G., H.S.J. Lee, and C.V.M. Barton, 1994 OTC Light and temperature not reported for growth EU: Scotland N(#) pers comm for T2 2129 Curtis, P.S., D.R. Zak, K.S. Pregitzer, and J.A. Teeri, 1994 OTC Temperature: local+3degC Watering regime: precip+W All rootboxes received 4.5 g/m2 N; similar to natural dry oak forest NA: N-Michigan 2131 Norby, R.J., Wullschleger, and C.A. Gunderson, 1996 OTC NA: Tennessee Sample size and SD from pers comm. 2152 Williams, R.S., D.E. Lincolm, and R.B. Thomas, 1994 OTC Watering regime: precip+W modified Hoagland 7mmol NH4NO3+1mmolPO4 /wk NA: North Carolina 2165 Lewis, J.D., R.B. Thomas, and B.R. Strain, 1994 GH Temperature: 28/17 - 28/22degC Watering regime: WW 1/2 strength Hoagland/wk; P Treatment: 0.083mM KH2PO4 vs 0.5mM KH2PO4: P stress NA: North Carolina inocculation Pisolithus tinctorius vs not 2186 Bassow, S.L., K.D.M. McConnaughay, and F.A. Bazzaz, 1994 GH Light: natural+supplement when light<500umol/m2/s i Photoperiod local: 6-19h Temperature: 28/22degC Fertilizer Treatment: 0.12 vs 1.2 g Osmocote > N input of 40 vs 400 kg N/ha/yr; 3 mo after initial Osmocote weekly 200 ml Peter's solution (20:20:20) at 0.042 v s 0.42 g/l/wk NA: Massachusetts N(#) F1: pers. comm 2217 Berryman, C.A., D. Eamus, and G.A. Duff, 1993 OTC Light: 65% of full Temperature: 29.7degC Watering regime: WW:3*day nutrients added; also 5 g low P Osmocote AU 2223 Bazzaz, F.A., and S.L. Miao, 1993 GH Light treatment: full gap light vs 37% thereof Temperature: 27/20 > 30/23degC Watering regime: WW nutrient treatment: N equivalents of 40 vs 400 kg N/ha/yr i.e. 0.18 vs 1.8 g Osmocote/pot NA: Massachusetts 2224 Lindroth, R.L., K.K. Kinney, and C.L. Platz, 1993 GH Light: 490 mol/m2/s 70cm above pots Photoperiod: 15h Temperature: 25/20degC Watering regime: WW/drip Humidity: 70/80% 1/2 strength Hoagland NA: Wisconsin native mycorrhiza in soil