Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Impacts of acid rain and ozone on vegetation in the Greater Mekong Sub region Lisa Emberson Patrick Büker, Tim Morrissey, Kevin Hicks,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Impacts of acid rain and ozone on vegetation in the Greater Mekong Sub region Lisa Emberson Patrick Büker, Tim Morrissey, Kevin Hicks,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Impacts of acid rain and ozone on vegetation in the Greater Mekong Sub region Lisa Emberson lisa.emberson@sei.se Patrick Büker, Tim Morrissey, Kevin Hicks, Johan Kuylenstierna, Steve Cinderby, Mike Ashmore, David Simpson, Juha-Pekka Tuovinen, Mark Zunckel, Miles Sowden, Barabara Badu, Vanessa Walsh

2 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Modelling methods - Experimental methods - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

3 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Modelling methods - Experimental methods - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

4 Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Stomatal flux/uptake/deposition Non-stomatal flux/uptake/deposition External plant surfaces Soil Air pollutant Gas, particle, aerosol, solute Direct Indirect lisa.emberson@sei.se

5 PollutantImpact modeImpactScale Ozone (O 3 )Direct (stomates)Visible injury, growth & yield reductions, chemical quality Regional Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) Direct (stomates & cuticle) Indirect * Visible injury, growth & yield reductions Soil acidification (growth & yield reductions) Local Regional Nitrogen oxides (NOx) Direct (stomates) Indirect * Growth & yield reductions Soil acidification (growth & yield reductions) Local Regional Hydrogen Fluorides (HF) Direct (stomates & cuticle) Visible injury, growth & yield reductions. Fluorosis in grazing animals Local Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM) Direct**Phytotoxicity, abrasive action, reduced light transmission, occlusion of stomates Local / Regional * At low concentrations can stimulate growth via fertilization effect ** Dependant upon chemical composition of particles lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ?

6 PollutantImpact modeImpactScale Ozone (O 3 )Direct (stomates)Visible injury, growth & yield reductions, chemical quality Regional Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) Direct (stomates & cuticle) Indirect * Visible injury, growth & yield reductions Soil acidification (growth & yield reductions) Local Regional Nitrogen oxides (NOx) Direct (stomates) Indirect * Growth & yield reductions Soil acidification (growth & yield reductions) Local Regional Hydrogen Fluorides (HF) Direct (stomates & cuticle) Visible injury, growth & yield reductions. Fluorosis in grazing animals Local Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM) Direct**Phytotoxicity, abrasive action, reduced light transmission, occlusion of stomates Local / Regional * At low concentrations can stimulate growth via fertilization effect ** Dependant upon chemical composition of particles lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ?

7 Decline of Veitch’s silver fir and maries fir. Japan (courtesy of T. Izuta) Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ?

8 Annual average pH of P Rodhe et al. 2002 Soil sensitivity to acidic deposition Kuylenstierna et al. 2001

9 The decrease in soil pH between 1927 to 1982-83 in a beech and spruce forest in southern Sweden (Hallbäcken and Tamm, 1985) Change in soil pH 1960 – 1994 at Zhurongfeng in S. China Dai et al. 1998 Observational evidence of soil acidification in China similar to Europe No real evidence in other parts of Asia lisa.emberson@sei.se

10 O 3 injury to rice, Pakistan (courtesy of A. Wahid) Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ?

11 Dentener et al. (2006) Current surface ozone in 2000 Europe36.6 ppb ± 4.2 United states38.7 ppb ± 4.9 South East Asia31.5 ppb ± 4.4

12 Dentener et al. (2006) CLE2000 – CLE2030 Europe+1.8 ± 1.5 United states+1.3 ± 2.4 South East Asia+3.8 ± 0.7 Δ in surface ozone between 2000 and 2030 current legislation scenario

13 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Modelling methods – Acid Deposition - Experimental methods - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

14 What methods exist to estimate risk? 1.Critical Load approach: deposition compared to threshold (CL) 2. Dynamic models – limited application except in China for some sites lisa.emberson@sei.se

15 Estimated exceedance of acidification CL of S only (Kuylenstierna et al. 2000) Exceedance of critical loads a static expression of risk but is it real? time dimension issue: acidification has not occurred for long enough for clear impacts to be seen? lisa.emberson@sei.se

16 “Serious acidification effects not likely to occur in next few decades in Asia except in China” Henning Rodhe lisa.emberson@sei.se

17 Estimates time development of acidification as a function of continued acidic deposition and variation in soil sensitivity over time Hicks et al. in prep

18 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Modelling methods - Experimental methods – surface ozone - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

19 Response Dose Assessing O 3 impacts to species/ cultivars

20 Experimental Methods individual pollutants & pollutant combinations establish dose response relationships pollutant interactions with other stresses Controlled exposure Free Air Concentration Enrichment (FACE) Temporary chambers Open Top Chambers Solardomes Indoor fumigation chambers / glasshouses Disturbance

21 Experimental Methods individual pollutants & pollutant combinations establish dose response relationships pollutant interactions with other stresses Controlled exposure Free Air Concentration Enrichment (FACE) Temporary chambers Open Top Chambers Solardomes Indoor fumigation chambers / glasshouses Disturbance

22

23 Response Dose Yield Nutritional quality Visible injury Concentration Flux Assessing O 3 impacts to species/ cultivars

24 * Annual mean* 7hr annual mean * 7hr growing season mean* AOT40 (53 ppb)

25 7 hr mean dose response relationships for different species including rice cf. Wang & Mauzerall 2004

26 AOT40 relationship with wheat (Triticum aestivum) grain yield Most robust AOT40 relationship 17 experiments, 6 countries, 10 growing seasons, 10 cultivars Critical Level : AOT40 of 3, 000 ppb.h. corresponding to 5% yield loss (99% confidence) calculated over a 3 month growing period (Fuhrer, 1996)

27 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Experimental methods - Modelling methods – surface ozone - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

28 How can we estimate air pollution impacts? Dose-Response Relationships

29 Modelling methods 3 month AOT40 simulations calculated with the MATCH model Engardt pers. comm., Emberson et al. in press

30 BUT Are these areas identified as being at risk from ground level ozone correct? How good is the provisional risk assessment modelling? lisa.emberson@sei.se Modelling methods

31 How good is the regional ozone concentration data? What are the receptors most at risk? How well can AQGs protect local species and varieties? Modelling methods

32 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Experimental methods - Modelling methods - Bio-monitoring methods – surface ozone Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

33 Bio-monitoring Bio-monitoring and Chemical Protectant Studies Established bio-indicator in Europe and North America Sensitive and resistant clones so can assess magnitude of air pollution impacts on visible injury & biomass. Buse et al. 2002/2003

34 Bio-monitoring and Chemical Protectant Studies Structural formula for N-(2-(2-oxo-1- imadazolidinyl)ethyl)-N’-phenylurea abbreviated as EDU for ethylenediurea EDU suppresses acute and chronic ozone injury on a variety of plants under ambient O 3 conditions (Godzik & Manning, 1998) Pakistan soybean cv. NARC-1 showing protective effect of EDU at a roadside rural site in Lahore, Pakistan (photo courtesy of A. Wahid) Bio-monitoring

35 All Bio-monitoring sites: Microloggers for T o C & RH % (30 min) Ozone passive samplers (2 week) At select sites: Solar radiation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) Continuous ozone monitoring (hourly) Soil water content Plant physiological parameters e.g. Photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, leaf area index, biochemical analysis (e.g. heavy metals, protein content….)

36 Bio-monitoring Europe & North America South Asia Southern Africa Provisional Risk Assessment Clover clone bio-monitoring EDU chemical protectant studyWheat Mung bean e.g. Maize staple Pulse 6 sites 5 sites India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Mozambique Zambia, Tanzania RAPIDC Project funded by Sida “Regional Air Pollution in Developing Countries”

37 How good is the regional ozone concentration data? Passive samplers, O 3 monitors What are the receptors most at risk? Local agricultural expertise How well can AQGs protect local species and varieties? Bio-monitoring evaluation of damage occurring within and outside provisionally assessed risk areas Bio-monitoring

38 How good is the regional ozone concentration data? Passive samplers, O 3 monitors What are the receptors most at risk? Local agricultural expertise How well can AQGs protect local species and varieties? Bio-monitoring evaluation of damage occurring within and outside provisionally assessed risk areas Bio-monitoring

39 Species type / cultivar Climate Precipitation patterns Sunshine hours Higher temperatures Atmospheric humidity Soil Moisture deficit Vegetation sensitivity Cropping patterns (growing season) Pollutant dispersion O 3 formation Agronomic practices Irrigation Fertilizer Breeding programmes (selecting increased / reduced crop sensitivity) Flux Dose modifiers Modelling methods

40 Surface Resistance R sur AOTx “Concentration” AFstY “Flux” Assessing O 3 impacts to species/ cultivars

41 Standard micrometeorological methods Constant R values Phenology Timing + length of GS Leaf/Needle age Canopy characteristics SAI + LAI; height Environmental variables: Irradiance Temperature VPD SWP Species / cover type characteristics g max Multiplicative g s model How do we model flux – the DO 3 SE model? > 10 cover types > 20 species

42 lisa.emberson@sei.se AFstY = for Fst i  Y nmol m -2 PLA s -1 Assessing O 3 impacts to species/ cultivars

43 How do flux and concentration based risk assessments compare? - Agriculture Crops

44 lisa.emberson@sei.se Emberson et al (2005) How well does the flux model perform?

45 The Air Pollution Crop Effect (APCEN) network 1.Advise on methodological development 2.To capacity build in the regions –provide technical support to the bio-monitoring campaigns 3.To help in translation of science to policy lisa.emberson@sei.se RAPIDC Regional air pollution in developing countries Bio-monitoring

46 The APCEN Network RegionNetwork Members Countries / regions represented Africa 8 Egypt, Kenya, Mozambique, South Africa, Zimbabwe Asia 43 India, Japan, Nepal, Pakistan, P.R. China, Philippines, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand The Americas, Europe and Australia 16Australia, Chile, Sweden, UK, USA

47 The APCEN network 2 nd APCEN workshop held in Stellenbosch, South Africa 2006

48 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Experimental methods - Modelling methods - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

49 Dentener et al. (2006) Why worry about surface ozone concentrations ? Δ in surface ozone between 2030 clim change and 2030 current legislation scenario and projected 2030 climate South East AsiaCLE2030c – CLE2030 -0.2 ± 0.6

50 Fuhrer et al. 2005

51 Morgan et al. 2006 FACE soybean (glycine max) experiment Increased O 3 concentrations over two growing seasons by 23 % - mimicking projections for 2050 Resulted in 20% loss in seed yield Results suggest even greater losses than those previously predicted by closed chamber studies O3O3 O3O3

52 R sto = 1/ (g max * f phen * f light * max {f min, (f temp * f VPD * f SWP )}) G max mmol O 3 m -2 s -1 * Phenology PAR SMDVPD ToCToC

53 Talk outline lisa.emberson@sei.se Why worry about air pollution impacts on vegetation ? Air pollution risk assessment methods for application in GMS : - Experimental methods - Modelling methods - Bio-monitoring methods Application incorporating additional stresses ? - Climate change - Hydrological stress

54 Zunckel et al 2004 Modelled ozone concentrations across Southern Africa Future applications ?

55 Growing season length and risk of drought in southern Africa Future applications ?

56 PEt & AEt f(Ra, Rb, Rsto) VPD & Net radiation P Ei Soil water PEt : AEt Relative yield Drought related yield losses O 3 related yield losses Compare ozone and drought stress to maize across region

57 Conclusions lisa.emberson@sei.se Acid deposition may be a problem in the future in parts of south east Asia O 3 is likely to be already causing damage to crops and forests in the GMS ? O 3 concentrations are projected to increase relatively rapidly over the next 20 to 50 years in this region As such, there is an urgent need to develop methods for O 3 risk assessment for the GMS region : These methods can be founded on existing experimental and modelling techniques which would ideally be supported by bio-monitoring evaluation In addition, methodological selection and development should ensure assessments can incorporate additional stresses such as climate change and hydrological related stresses

58 This research is supported by Sida and Defra Acknowledgements lisa.emberson@sei.se Related projects are also supported by the EU and START PACOM.


Download ppt "Impacts of acid rain and ozone on vegetation in the Greater Mekong Sub region Lisa Emberson Patrick Büker, Tim Morrissey, Kevin Hicks,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google