Assessment of Crop Loss From Air Pollutants 1988
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-1367-7_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pollutant Deposition to Individual Leaves and Plant Canopies: Sites of Regulation and Relationship to Injury

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the vegetation, physicochemical deposition is accompanied by active uptake through aboveground plant parts which in turn is influenced by compensation points and foliar N status of the plant considered. According to the resistance model (Taylor et al, 1988;Weseley, 1989;Gauger et al, 2000), the efficiency of this direct atmospheric N uptake is chiefly determined by the transfer resistance of the boundary layer on the surface of the leaf to its interior (substomatal area), the stomatal resistance and the mesophyll resistance inside the leaf cells. The total N uptake by vegetation at a given immission concentration results from this efficiency and the effective total leaf surface area.…”
Section: Principle Of the Itni Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the vegetation, physicochemical deposition is accompanied by active uptake through aboveground plant parts which in turn is influenced by compensation points and foliar N status of the plant considered. According to the resistance model (Taylor et al, 1988;Weseley, 1989;Gauger et al, 2000), the efficiency of this direct atmospheric N uptake is chiefly determined by the transfer resistance of the boundary layer on the surface of the leaf to its interior (substomatal area), the stomatal resistance and the mesophyll resistance inside the leaf cells. The total N uptake by vegetation at a given immission concentration results from this efficiency and the effective total leaf surface area.…”
Section: Principle Of the Itni Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model calculates stomatal resistance (r s ) as the inverse of stomatal conductance, which is estimated based on the leaf photosynthetic rate, relative humidity, and surface CO 2 concentration using the Ball-Berry formula (for more details, see [46]). The mesophyll and cuticular resistance values are set based on those reported in the literature: for NO 2 , r m = 100 s m −1 [48] and r t = 20,000 s m −1 [49]; for O 3 , r m = 10 s m −1 [48] and r t = 10,000 s m −1 [50,51]; and for SO 2 , r m = 0 [49] and r t = 8000 s m −1 . As CO reduction is assumed to be independent of photosynthesis and transpiration, the resistance value for CO is set to 50,000 s m −1 in the in-leaf season and 1,000,000 s m −1 in the out-leaf season for all trees [52].…”
Section: Air Pollution Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mechanistic work has suggested HNO 3 , in contrast to other reactive N gases, is primarily deposited to the cuticle rather than taken up via stomata (Dasch 1989;Marshall and Cadle 1989). Modeling based on the chemical characteristics of HNO 3 (Taylor et al 1988;Hanson and Taylor 1990) and 15 N-HNO 3 tracer studies (e.g., Vose and Swank 1990) have further supported that HNO 3 is primarily deposited to leaf cuticles.…”
Section: Once In the Apoplast Nhmentioning
confidence: 99%