4.7 Article

Gross primary production and ecosystem respiration of irrigated maize and irrigated soybean during a growing season

期刊

AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY
卷 131, 期 3-4, 页码 180-190

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.05.007

关键词

ecosystem; maize; soybean

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using eddy covariance flux measurements, gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (R-e) of irrigated maize and soybean fields were quantified and examined in terms of relevant controlling variables. Even though the peak green leaf area index (GLAI) of the maize and soybean canopies was comparable (about 5.8 m(2) m(-2)), the maize GLAI increased more rapidly during the vegetative growth stages and peaked a month earlier compared to the soybean canopy. In both fields, seasonal changes in GLAI explained about 95% of the variability in GPP (at a given incident PAR = 1400-1500 mu mol m(-2) s(-1)). On a day-to-day basis, during the peak growth period in both fields, the hourly daytime values of GPP showed a strong hyperbolic relationship with incident photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Peak hourly GPP was 3.2 and 2.0 mg m(-2) s(-1) for the maize and C S soybean crops, respectively. At night, within narrow ranges of green leaf area throughout the growing season, exponential relationships using air temperature explained between 39 and 88% of the variability in R, of both crops. The growing season cumulative GPP of maize was 1744 g C m(-2) larger than most natural ecosystems except a few very productive forests. Cumulative ecosystem respiration of maize was H 54 g C m(-2). The cumulative GPP and R, of soybean were both substantially smaller than maize (966 and 826 g C m(-2) respectively). Differences in GPP and R, between the two fields were largely related c to greater photosynthetic capacity of the maize crop, which also resulted in a more rapid canopy development compared to soybean. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据