Sensitivity of Ozone Dry Deposition to Ecosystem‐Atmosphere Interactions: A Critical Appraisal of Observations and Simulations

Lin, Meiyun; Malyshev, Sergey; Shevliakova, Elena; Paulot, Fabien; Horowitz, Larry W.; Fares, Silvano; Mikkelsen, Teis Nørgaard; Zhang, Leiming

doi:10.1029/2018gb006157

Cited by 44 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 99 publications

(179 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stomatal deposition is reduced on the part of the leaf that is wet by dew or rain; this happens through a 30% decrease in A net and stomatal conductance on the wet part of the leaf. This is a correction to Paulot et al () and Lin et al () who reduce stomatal deposition by the fraction of the leaf that is wet in addition to the 30% decrease in A net and stomatal conductance that we retain here.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Much of the attention around ozone dry deposition is on its influence on summer ozone pollution. Previous work examines changes in ozone dry deposition with environmental conditions, ambient carbon dioxide, and land use/land cover as well as the impact of dry deposition on summer surface ozone (Andersson & Engardt, ; Anav et al, ; Fu & Tai, ; Ganzeveld et al, ; Geddes et al, ; Heald & Geddes, ; Hollaway et al, ; Huang et al, ; Lin et al, ; Solberg et al, ; Trail et al, ; Wong et al, ; Wu et al, ). The aforementioned analyses linking surface ozone with ozone dry deposition all rely on models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of Dynamic Ozone Dry Deposition on Ozone Pollution

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying the contributions of chemistry and transport to observed ozone pollution using regional-to-global models relies on accurate representation of ozone dry deposition. We use a recently developed configuration of the NOAA GFDL chemistry-climate model -in which the atmosphere and land are coupled through dry deposition-to investigate the influence of ozone dry deposition on ozone pollution over northern midlatitudes. In our model, deposition pathways are tied to dynamic terrestrial processes, such as photosynthesis and water cycling through the canopy and soil. Small increases in winter deposition due to more process-based representation of snow and deposition to surfaces reduce hemispheric-scale ozone throughout the lower troposphere by 5-12 ppb, improving agreement with observations relative to a simulation with the standard configuration for ozone dry deposition. Declining snow cover by the end of the 21st-century tempers the previously identified influence of rising methane on winter ozone. Dynamic dry deposition changes summer surface ozone by −4 to +7 ppb. While previous studies emphasize the importance of uptake by plant stomata, new diagnostic tracking of depositional pathways reveals a widespread impact of nonstomatal deposition on ozone pollution. Daily variability in both stomatal and nonstomatal deposition contribute to daily variability in ozone pollution. Twenty-first century changes in summer deposition result from a balance among changes in individual pathways, reflecting differing responses to both high carbon dioxide (through plant physiology versus biomass accumulation) and water availability. Our findings highlight a need for constraints on the processes driving ozone dry deposition to test representation in regional-to-global models.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Dynamic Ozone Dry Deposition on Ozone Pollution

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While some dry deposition schemes employ A net -g s models (Charusombat et al, 2010;Clifton, 2018;Hollaway et al, 2016;M. Lin et al, 2019;Ran et al, 2017;Val Martin et al, 2014), the Jarvis type of model remains ubiquitous (e.g., Emberson, et al, 2000;Hardacre et al, 2015).…”

Section: Modeling Stomatal Conductancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerical simulations of tropospheric ozone, including high ozone pollution episodes and background ozone levels, are sensitive to model descriptions of ozone dry deposition (Anav et al, 2018;Beddows et al, 2017;Bela et al, 2015;Campbell et al, 2019;Clifton, 2018;Emberson et al, 2013;Falk & Søvde Haslerud, 2019;Hogrefe et al, 2018;Huang et al, 2016;J.-T. Lin et al, 2008;M. Lin et al, 2017M. Lin et al, , 2019Matichuk et al, 2017;Silva & Heald, 2018;Solberg et al, 2008;Tang et al, 2011;Val Martin et al, 2014;Vautard et al, 2005;Vieno et al, 2010;Walker, 2014;Wild, 2007;A.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dry Deposition of Ozone Over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling

Clifton

Fiore

Massman

et al. 2020

Reviews of Geophysics

Self Cite

114

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dry deposition of ozone is an important sink of ozone in near‐surface air. When dry deposition occurs through plant stomata, ozone can injure the plant, altering water and carbon cycling and reducing crop yields. Quantifying both stomatal and nonstomatal uptake accurately is relevant for understanding ozone's impact on human health as an air pollutant and on climate as a potent short‐lived greenhouse gas and primary control on the removal of several reactive greenhouse gases and air pollutants. Robust ozone dry deposition estimates require knowledge of the relative importance of individual deposition pathways, but spatiotemporal variability in nonstomatal deposition is poorly understood. Here we integrate understanding of ozone deposition processes by synthesizing research from fields such as atmospheric chemistry, ecology, and meteorology. We critically review methods for measurements and modeling, highlighting the empiricism that underpins modeling and thus the interpretation of observations. Our unprecedented synthesis of knowledge on deposition pathways, particularly soil and leaf cuticles, reveals process understanding not yet included in widely used models. If coordinated with short‐term field intensives, laboratory studies, and mechanistic modeling, measurements from a few long‐term sites would bridge the molecular to ecosystem scales necessary to establish the relative importance of individual deposition pathways and the extent to which they vary in space and time. Our recommended approaches seek to close knowledge gaps that currently limit quantifying the impact of ozone dry deposition on air quality, ecosystems, and climate.

show abstract

“…cuticle, soil, reaction with biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs); Fares et al, 2010;Wolfe et al, 2011). Meanwhile, stomatal uptake of O 3 inflicts damage on plants by initiating reactions that impair their photosynthetic and stomatal regulatory capacity (Hoshika et al, 2014;Lombardozzi et al, 2012;Reich, 1987). Widespread plant damage has the potential to alter the global water cycle (Lombardozzi et al, 2015) and suppress the land carbon sink (Sitch et al, 2007), as well as generate a cascade of feedbacks that affect atmospheric composition including ozone itself (Sadiq et al, 2017;Zhou et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Importance of dry deposition parameterization choice in global simulations of surface ozone

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dry deposition is a major sink of tropospheric ozone. Increasing evidence has shown that ozone dry deposition actively links meteorology and hydrology with ozone air quality. However, there is little systematic investigation on the performance of different ozone dry deposition parameterizations at the global scale and how parameterization choice can impact surface ozone simulations. Here, we present the results of the first global, multidecadal modelling and evaluation of ozone dry deposition velocity (v d ) using multiple ozone dry deposition parameterizations. We model ozone dry deposition velocities over 1982-2011 using four ozone dry deposition parameterizations that are representative of current approaches in global ozone dry deposition modelling. We use consistent assimilated meteorology, land cover, and satellite-derived leaf area index (LAI) across all four, such that the differences in simulated v d are entirely due to differences in deposition model structures or assumptions about how land types are treated in each. In addition, we use the surface ozone sensitivity to v d predicted by a chemical transport model to estimate the impact of mean and variability of ozone dry deposition velocity on surface ozone. Our estimated v d values from four different parameterizations are evaluated against field observations, and while performance varies considerably by land cover types, our results suggest that none of the parameterizations are universally better than the others. Discrepancy in simulated mean v d among the parameterizations is estimated to cause 2 to 5 ppbv of discrepancy in surface ozone in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and up to 8 ppbv in tropical rainforests in July, and up to 8 ppbv in tropical rainforests and seasonally dry tropical forests in Indochina in December. Parameterization-specific biases based on individual land cover type and hydroclimate are found to be the two main drivers of such discrepancies. We find statistically significant trends in the multiannual time series of simulated July daytime v d in all parameterizations, driven by warming and drying (southern Amazonia, southern African savannah, and Mongolia) or greening (high latitudes). The trend in July daytime v d is estimated to be 1 % yr −1 and leads to up to 3 ppbv of surface ozone changes over 1982-2011. The interannual coefficient of variation (CV) of July daytime mean v d in NH is found to be 5 %-15 %, with spatial distribution that varies with the dry deposition parameterization. Our sensitivity simulations suggest this can contribute between 0.5 to 2 ppbv to interannual variability (IAV) in surface ozone, but all models tend to underestimate interannual CV when compared to long-term ozone flux observations. We also find that IAV in some dry deposition parameterizations is more sensitive to LAI, while in others it is more sensitive to climate. Comparisons with other published estimates of the IAV of background ozone confirm that ozone dry deposition can be an important part of natural surface ozone variability. Our results...

show abstract

Sensitivity of Ozone Dry Deposition to Ecosystem‐Atmosphere Interactions: A Critical Appraisal of Observations and Simulations

Cited by 44 publications

References 99 publications

Influence of Dynamic Ozone Dry Deposition on Ozone Pollution

Influence of Dynamic Ozone Dry Deposition on Ozone Pollution

Dry Deposition of Ozone Over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling

Importance of dry deposition parameterization choice in global simulations of surface ozone

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About