Changes in stratospheric ozone

The ozone layer in the upper atmosphere is a natural feature of the earth's environment. It performs several important functions, including shielding the earth from damaging solar ultraviolet radiation. Far from being static, ozone concentrations rise and fall under the forces of photochemical production, catalytic chemical destruction, and fluid dynamical transport. Human activities are projected to deplete substantially stratospheric ozone through anthropogenic increases in the global concentrations of key atmospheric chemicals. Human-induced perturbations may be occurring already.

The Greenhouse effect: impacts of ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation, carbon dioxide (CO2), and ozone (O3) on vegetation

There is a fast growing and an extremely serious international scientific, public and political concern regarding man's influence on the global climate. The decrease in stratospheric ozone (O3) and the consequent possible increase in ultraviolet-B (UV-B) is a critical issue. In addition, tropospheric concentrations of 'greenhouse gases' such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4) are increasing. These phenomena, coupled with man's use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), chlorocarbons (CCs), and organo-bromines (OBs) are considered to result in the modification of the earth's O3 column and altered interactions between the stratosphere and the troposphere. A result of such interactions could be the global warming. As opposed to these processes, tropospheric O3 concentrations appear to be increasing in some parts of the world (e.g. North America). Such tropospheric increases in O3 and particulate matter may offset any predicted increases in UV-B at those locations. Presently most general circulation models (GCMs) used to predict climate change are one- or two-dimensional models. Application of satisfactory three-dimensional models is limited by the available computer power. Recent studies on radiative cloud forcing show that clouds may have an excess cooling effect to compensate for a doubling of global CO2 concentrations. There is a great deal of geographic patchiness or variability in climate. Use of global level average values fails to account for this variability. For example, in North America: 1. there may be a decrease in the stratospheric O3 column (1-3%); however, there appears to be an increase in tropospheric O3 concentrations (1-2%/year) to compensate up to 20-30% loss in the total O3 column; 2. there appears to be an increase in tropospheric CO2, N2O and CH4 at the rate of roughly 0.8%, 0.3% and 1-2%, respectively, per year; 3. there is a decrease in erythemal UV-B; and 4. there is a cooling of tropospheric air temperature due to radiative cloud forcing. The effects of UV-B, CO2 and O3 on plants have been studied under growth chamber, greenhouse and field conditions. Few studies, if any, have examined the joint effects of more than one variable on plant response. There are methodological problems associated with many of these experiments. Thus, while results obtained from these studies can assist in our understanding, they must be viewed with caution in the context of the real world and predictions into the future. Biomass responses of plants to enhanced UV-B can be negative (adverse effect); positive (stimulatory effect) or no effect (tolerant). Sensitivity rankings have been developed for both crop and tree species. However, such rankings for UV-B do not consider dose-response curves. There are inconsistencies between the results obtained under controlled conditions versus field observations. Some of these inconsistencies appear due to the differences in responses between cultivars and varieties of a given plant species; and differences in the experimental methodology and protocol used. Nevertheless, based on the available literature, listings of sensitive crop and native plant species to UV-B are provided. Historically, plant biologists have studied the effects of CO2 on plants for many decades. Experiments have been performed under growth chamber, greenhouse and field conditions. Evidence is presented for various plant species in the form of relative yield increases due to CO2 enrichment. Sensitivity rankings (biomass response) are agein provided for crops and native plant species. However, most publications on the numerical analysis of cause-effect relationships do not consider sensitivity analysis of the mode used. Ozone is considered to be the most phytotoxic regional scale air pollutant. In the pre-occupation of loss in the O3 column, any increases in tropospheric O3 concentrations may be undermined relative to vegetation effects. As with the other stress factors, the effects of O3 have been studied both under controlled and field conditions. Thboth under controlled and field conditions. The numerical explanation of cause-effect relationships of O3 is a much debated subject at the present time. Much of the controversy is directed toward the definition of the highly stochastic, O3 exposure dynamics in time and space. Nevertheless, sensitivity rankings (biomass response) are provided for crops and native vegetation. The joint effects of UV-B, CO2 and O3 are poorly understood. Based on the literature of plant response to individual stress factors and chemical and physical climatology of North America, we conclude that nine different crops may be sensitive to the joint effects: three grain and six vegetable crops (sorghum, oat, rice, pea, bean, potato, lettuce, cucumber and tomato). In North America, we consider Ponderosa and loblolly pines as vulnerable among tree species. This conclusion should be moderated by the fact that there are few, if any, data on hardwood species. In conclusion there is much concern for global climate change and its possible effects on vegetation. While this is necessary, such a concern and any predictions must be tempered by the lack of sufficient knowledge. Experiments must be designed on an integrated and realistic basis to answer the question more definitively. This would require very close co-operation and communication among scientists from multiple disciplines. Decision makers must realize this need.

Atmospheric ozone: formation and effects on vegetation

Ozone (O(3)) is present both in the troposphere and the stratosphere. Troposphere O(3) is predominantly produced by photochemical reactions involving precursors generated by natural processes and to a much larger extent by man's activities. There is evidence for a trend towards increasing tropospheric O(3) concentrations. However, tropospheric O(3) is known to account for only 10% of the vertical O(3) column above the earth's surface. The stratosphere accounts for an additional 90% of the O(3) column. There is evidence to suggest that there are losses in the stratospheric O(3) due to the updraft of O(3) destroying pollutants generated by both natural processes and by human activity. Such a loss in stratospheric O(3) can result in alterations of incidence in the ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the earth's surface. Tropospheric O(3) is known to be highly phytotoxic. Appropriate exposures to O(3) can result in both acute (symptomatic) and chronic (changes in growth, yield or productivity and quality) effects. Chronic effects are of great concern in terms of both crops and forests. A number of experimental techniques are available to evaluate the chronic effects of O(3) on plants. There are limitations attached to the use of these techniques. However, results obtained, with such techniques are valuable if interpreted in the appropriate context. Among all field evaluation techniques, open-top chambers are the most frequently used method for evaluating the chronic effects of O(3) on crops. The National Crop Loss Assessment Program (NCLAN) of the United States is the largest such effort. However, given the limitations of the open-top chambers and the experimental aspects of NCLAN, its results must be interpreted with caution. On the other hand, acute effects can be evaluated with less complexity through the use of biological indicator plants. The numerical modelling of such effects are also far less complicated than establishing numerical cause and effects relationships for chronic effects. Confounding the acute or chronic responses of plants to O(3), is the presence of other kinds and forms of pollutants in the ambient atmosphere and the incidence of pathogens and pests. The resulting complex interactions and joint effects on plants are poorly understood. Future research must address these issues. In the final analysis we have re-emphasized the fact that plant health is the product of its interaction with the physical and chemical climatology and pathogens and pests. What we have described in this context is the importance of tropospheric O(3) within the chemical climatology of our environment and its effects on vegetation.