Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Ecosystem photosynthesis inferred from measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux

Abstract

Limited understanding of carbon dioxide sinks and sources on land is often linked to the inability to distinguish between the carbon dioxide taken up by photosynthesis, and that released by respiration1,2. Carbonyl sulphide, a sulphur-containing analogue of carbon dioxide, is also taken up by plants, and could potentially serve as a powerful proxy for photosynthetic carbon dioxide uptake, which cannot be directly measured above the leaf scale. Indeed, variations in atmospheric concentrations of carbonyl sulphide are closely related to those of carbon dioxide at regional, local and leaf scales3,4,5,6,7,8,9. Here, we use eddy covariance and laser spectroscopy10 to estimate the net exchange of carbon dioxide and carbonyl sulphide across three pine forests, a cotton field and a wheat field in Israel. We estimate gross primary productivity—a measure of ecosystem photosynthesis—directly from the carbonyl sulphide fluxes, and indirectly from carbon dioxide fluxes. The two estimates agree within an error of ±15%. The ratio of carbonyl sulphide to carbon dioxide flux at the ecosystem scale was consistent with the variability in mixing ratios observed on seasonal timescales in the background atmosphere. We suggest that atmospheric measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux could provide an independent constraint on estimates of gross primary productivity, key to projecting the response of the land biosphere to climate change.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Daily changes in mixing ratios and fluxes of CO2 and COS.
Figure 2: Diurnal cycles in photosynthetic GPP.
Figure 3: Relative uptake of COS versus CO2.

References

  1. Raupach, M. R. Pinning down the land carbon sink. Nature Clim. Change 1, 148–149 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pan, Y. et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the World’s forests. Science 333, 988–993 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell, J. E. et al. Photosynthetic control of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide during the growing season. Science 322, 1085–1088 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Montzka, S. A. et al. On the global distribution, seasonality, and budget of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide (COS) and some similarities to CO2 . J. Geophys. Res. 112, 9302–9317 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Blonquist, J. M. et al. The potential of carbonyl sulfide as a proxy for gross primary production at flux tower sites. J. Geophys. Res. 116, 4019–4037 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stimler, K., Montzka, S., Berry, J. A, Rudich, Y. & Yakir, D. Relationships between carbonyl sulfide (COS) and CO2 during leaf gas exchange. New Phytol. 186, 869–978 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Stimler, K., Berry, J. A. & Yakir, D. Variations in leaf COS/CO2 uptake across species and a possible COS mediated H2S effect on stomatal conductance. Plant Physiol. 158, 524–530 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sandoval-Soto, L. et al. Global uptake of carbonyl sulfide (COS) by terrestrial vegetation: Estimates corrected by deposition velocities normalized to the uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2). Biogeosciences 2, 125–132 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Seibt, U., Kesselmeier, J., Sandoval-Soto, L., Kuhn, U. & Berry, J. A. A kinetic analysis of leaf uptake of COS and its relation to transpiration, photosynthesis and carbon isotope fractionation. Biogeosciences 7, 333–341 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Stimler, K., Nelson, D. & Yakir, D. High precision measurements of atmospheric concentrations and plant exchange rates of carbonyl sulfide (COS) using mid-IR quantum cascade laser. Glob. Change Biol. 16, 2496–2503 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bruhl, C., Lelieveld, J., Crutzen, P. J. & Tost, H. The role of carbonyl sulphide as a source of stratospheric aerosol and its impact on climate. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 1239–1253 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Watts, S. F. The mass budgets of carbonyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfide, carbon disulfide and hydrogen sulfide. Atmos. Environ. 34, 761–779 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kettle, A. J. et al. Comparing forward and inverse models to estimate the seasonal variation of hemisphere-integrated fluxes of carbonyl sulfide. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2, 343–361 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Protoschill-Krebs, G. & Kesselmeier, J. Enzymatic pathways for the metabolization of carbonyl sulphide (COS) by higher plants. Bot. Acta 108, 445–448 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Baldocchi, D. et al. FLUXNET: A new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 82, 2415–2434 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kesselmeier, J., Teusch, N. & Kuhn, U. Controlling variables for the uptake of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide (COS) by soil. J. Geophys. Res. 104, 11577–11584 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Steinbacher, M., Bingemer, H. G. & Schmidt, U. Measurements of the exchange of carbonyl sulfide (OCS) and carbon disulfide (CS2) between soil and atmosphere in a spruce forest in central Germany. Atmos. Environ. 38, 6043–6052 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhn, U. et al. Carbonyl sulfide exchange on an ecosystem scale: Soil represents a dominant sink for atmospheric COS. Atmos. Environ. 33, 995–1008 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yi, Z. et al. Soil uptake of carbonyl sulfide in subtropical forests withdifferent successional stages in south China. J. Geophys. Res. 112, 8302–8313 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sandoval-Soto, L., Kesselmeier, M., Schmitt, V., Wild, A. & Kesselmeier, J. Observations of the uptake of carbonyl sulfide (COS) by trees under elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Biogeosciences 9, 2935–2945 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Reichstein, M. et al. On the separation of net ecosystem exchange into assimilation and ecosystem respiration: Review and improved algorithm. Glob. Change Biol. 11, 1424–1439 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Seibt, U., Rajabi, A., Griffiths, H. & Berry, J. A. Carbon isotopes and water use efficiency: Sense and sensitivity. Oecologia 155, 441–454 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wohlfahrt, G. et al. Carbonyl sulfide (COS) as a tracer for canopy photosynthesis, transpiration and stomatal conductance: Potential and limitations. Plant Cell Envir. 35, 657–667 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wilske, B. et al. The CO2 exchange of biological soil crusts in a semiarid grass-shrubland at the northern transition zone of the Negev desert, Israel. Biogeosciences 5, 1411–1423 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kuhn, U. & Kesselmeier, J. Environmental variables controlling the uptake of carbonyl sulfide by lichens. J. Geophys. Res. 105, 26783–26792 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Falge, E. et al. Seasonality of ecosystem respiration and gross primary production as derived from FLUXNET measurements. Agri. Forest Meteorol. 113, 53–74 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Grunzweig, G. M., Lin, T., Rotenberg, E., Schwartz, A. & Yakir, D. Carbon sequestration in arid-land forest. Glob. Change Biol. 9, 791–799 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Goulden, M. L., Munger, J. W., Fan, S. M., Daube, B. C. & Wofsy, S. C. Measurements of carbon sequestration by long-term eddy covariance: Methods and a critical evaluation of accuracy. Glob. Change Biol. 2, 169–182 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to G. Fratini for help using EddyPro, and to M. Cuntz, G. Wohlfart and J. Berry for helpful discussions. The technical help of H. Sagi and A. Pelner are gratefully acknowledge. This work was made possible by financial support from the Israel Science Foundation (ISF), the Minerva foundation, the JNF-KKL, and the C. Wills and R. Lewis program in Environmental Science.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

D.Y. conceived the study. D.A. performed all COS measurements. D.A., E.R., U.D. and F.T. carried out all of the field measurements and data analysis. S.A.M. provided the atmospheric data. D.Y. and D.A. wrote the paper with discussions and contributions to interpretations of the results from all co-authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Yakir.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 1128 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Asaf, D., Rotenberg, E., Tatarinov, F. et al. Ecosystem photosynthesis inferred from measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux. Nature Geosci 6, 186–190 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1730

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1730

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing