Ecosystem photosynthesis inferred from measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux

David Asaf, Eyal Rotenberg, Fyodor Tatarinov, Uri Dicken, Stephen A. Montzka, Dan Yakir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Limited understanding of carbon dioxide sinks and sources on land is often linked to the inability to distinguish between the carbon dioxide taken up by photosynthesis, and that released by respiration1,2. Carbonyl sulphide, a sulphur-containing analogue of carbon dioxide, is also taken up by plants, and could potentially serve as a powerful proxy for photosynthetic carbon dioxide uptake, which cannot be directly measured above the leaf scale. Indeed, variations in atmospheric concentrations of carbonyl sulphide are closely related to those of carbon dioxide at regional, local and leaf scales3-9. Here, we use eddy covariance and laser spectroscopy 10 to estimate the net exchange of carbon dioxide and carbonyl sulphide across three pine forests, a cotton field and a wheat field in Israel. We estimate gross primary productivity-a measure of ecosystem photosynthesis-directly from the carbonyl sulphide fluxes, and indirectly from carbon dioxide fluxes. The two estimates agree within an error of ±15%. The ratio of carbonyl sulphide to carbon dioxide flux at the ecosystem scale was consistent with the variability in mixing ratios observed on seasonal timescales in the background atmosphere. We suggest that atmospheric measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux could provide an independent constraint on estimates of gross primary productivity, key to projecting the response of the land biosphere to climate change.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)186-190
Number of pages5
JournalNature Geoscience
Volume6
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2013

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • General Earth and Planetary Sciences

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Ecosystem photosynthesis inferred from measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this