ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor

Lecture 1, Introduction
Lecture 1. Introduction and Overview

August 25, 2010

ESPM/EPS 129, Biometeorology

MWF 11-12
306 Wellman Hall
University of California, Berkeley

Instructor: Dennis Baldocchi

Professor of Biometeorology
Ecosystem Science Division
Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management
345 Hilgard Hall
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720

Email: Baldocchi@nature.berkeley.edu
Phone: 510-642-2874
Fax: 510-643-5098
Web Site: http://nature.berkeley.edu/biometlab

Lecture 1 Outline

1. Introduction: What is Biometeorology?

2. Goals of the Course, Philosophy and Expectations
3. Course Outline

L1.1 Introduction

Biometeorology involves the study of interactions between the physical environment and
all of Life's forms, including terrestrial and marine vertebrates, invertebrates, plants,
funghi and bacteria. In ESPM/EPS 129, we will focus on a narrower aspect of
biometeorology: ‘how the terrestrial biosphere breathes?’

Principles taught in this course will serve students interested in quantitative and
qualitative aspects of environmental sciences. Lectures draw on principles derived from
a diverse but interconnected set of fields like atmospheric science, ecosystem ecology,
plant physiology, biogeochemistry, hydrology, soil physics, agriculture and forestry.
Agricultural and Forest Management problems that require biometeorological
information include integrated management of pests, frost and spray drift, irrigation
scheduling, crop modeling, vineyard, orchard and plantation site selection, optimal crop
design, wind breaks, and cultural practices (e.g. tillage practice, row orientation and soil
mulching). Science problems using biometeorological principles and data involve the
predicting and diagnosing weather and climate, biogeochemical cycles of carbon, water

1
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
and nutrients, water balance of watersheds and the growth and dynamics of forests and
ecosystems.

L1.2 Topic Overview

A link between climate and vegetation have long been recognized by farmers, foresters
and playwrights for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. The word climate is coined
from the Greek word for slope, ‘klima’. The Greeks understood that different types of
vegetation and weather occurred on different hill slopes.

Citations to plant-atmosphere interactions can also be drawn from more contemporary

literature. In the play, Uncle Vanya by Anton Checkov (1899), the Doctor refers to
plants and climate, with a modern sense:

"... forests tremble under the axe, millions of trees are lost, animals and birds
have to flee, rivers dry out, beautiful landscapes are lost forever.....waters are
polluted, wildlife disappears, the climate is harsher...".

In a latter passage he says:

"...the forest teaches us to appreciate beauty, it softens the harshness of the

climate",

The physical status of the atmosphere is defined by its temperature, humidity, wind
speed, and pressure. But how does the atmosphere maintain its physical state? To
answer this question we must assess the fluxes of heat, energy and momentum into and
out of the atmosphere, which is analogous to studying the flows of water into and out of a
bathtub to determine the level of water inside.

For an illustrative example, let’s consider the factors that control atmospheric humidity
(Figure 1). Its content in the atmosphere depends on gains by surface evaporation and
losses by precipitation (rain, snow) and dew formation. The pertinent question asked by
the biometeorologist is: what controls evaporation? To answer this question we must
start invoking explanations that involve plants. Plants intercept sunlight and the
intercepted sunlight heats the soil and leaves and drives transpiration and evaporation.
Plants also exert drag on the wind. This alters turbulent mixing and the transfer of
moisture from the surface to the atmosphere.

2
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Figure 1 Links between plants and the flow of heat, water, CO2 and sunlight.

The ability of plants to exert an influence on the humidity budget of the atmosphere also
depends upon how plants respond to their environment. The humidity of the air alters
the opening of stomata on leaves and rates of transpiration. The heat budget and the
consequential temperature of the leaves controls respiration (leaves, roots, microbes),
photosynthesis, trace gas volatilization, saturation vapor pressure, plant growth, kinetic
rates of biochemical reactions. Sunlight drives photosynthesis, which is linked to
stomatal conductance and growth. Photosynthesis and photorespiration depend upon
CO2 levels. Finally, if moisture in the atmosphere condenses, it forms clouds and these
clouds can precipitate. On climatic time scales, the water balance of the soil affects
transpiration, stomatal conductance, photosynthesis, soil respiration, plant growth, plant
competition, species and leaf area.

The rates at which trace gases and energy are transferred between the biosphere and
atmosphere depend upon a complex and non-linear interplay among physiological,
ecological, biochemical, chemical and edaphic factors and meteorological conditions.
Contemporary theories consider the exchanges of energy and mass in concert. Flows of
energy need to be calculated because the biosphere requires energy to perform work. Gas
exchange activities requiring energy and work include biosynthesis, evaporation,
transport of nutrients and carbon dioxide fixation. Concurrently, these activities require
flows of substrate material. Water and carbon and nitrogen based compounds are the
most important forms of matter for the sustenance of life.

3
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
Scale is an important concept we must concern ourselves with when studying
biometeorology. To understand why, let’s consider the functioning of a plant canopy, 1
m tall. It consists of leaves, an order of magnitude smaller, and it is the functioning of
the leaves, a smaller scale phenomenon, that helps us understand the functioning of the
canopy. Now the environment imposed on the canopy comes from a much larger scale,
that of the planetary boundary layer and regional weather, with scales of kilometers.

Another concept to consider is emergent processes. As we transcend scales new

processes emerge, while others may become less important. For example, the net
exchange of water vapor at the canopy scale is not simply the average rate of
transpiration of a leaf multiplied by the number of leaves and their area. We must also
consider soil evaporation. In addition, as one adds more and more leaves, their
contribution to canopy evaporation diminishes, as their upper neighbors have already
harvested most of the photons and solar energy that drives evaporation.

Issues relating to scale, non-linear, coupled processes and emergent processes are
important as they are attributes of complex systems, which are deterministic, but can
have chaotic responses, and are sensitive to initial conditions.

The plant, weather and climate processes of interest are associated with a huge range of
time and space scales.

Space scales of interest include:

1. cell: microns (10-6m)

2. leaf: 0.01 to 0.1 m (needles to broad-leaves)
3. plants and vegetation canopies: 0.1 to 100 m (grass to redwoods)
4. surface boundary layer (50 to 1000m): scale of individual fields
5. planetary boundary layers (100 to 3000m): scale of the planetary boundary layer,
where the earth surface affects the properties of the overlying atmosphere.
6. landscape: (1 km to 10 km): patch size of mosaic of extended fields, lakes and forests.
Patches are large enough to affect convection and advection.
7. region to globe (100 km to 10000km): the scale of biomes, continents and oceans,
scales of atmospheric waves, fronts and storms

Temporal scales of interest to us include:

1-10 hz: sunflecks and wind fluctuations:

30-500 s: coherent turbulent structures and sun patches:
100 to 3000 s: photosynthetic and stomatal inductance
3600-86400s: hourly and diurnal movement of earth/sun, water movement through stems,
convective cloud generation and dissipation:
~7 days: weekly sequence of frontal passages, swings in temperature, humidity
60 to 120 days: season variations in phenology, growth, adaptation, drought, frost, soil
temperature wave
year: 365 days: summation of seasonal effects

4
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
decade: climate, inter-annual variability, El Nino, volcanos).

Overall, spatial and temporal information, of interest to biometeorologists span 8 to 10

orders of magnitude (10-6 to 104 m; 10-2 to 106 s).

Climate

continent Ecosystem Dynamics:

Weather: species, functional
ppt, T, u, type
Rg
region/biome Biogeo-
chemistry:

landscape Biophysics: LAI, C/N, Vcmax

E, H, A, Gc
canopy

centuries
seconds

years
days

Figure 2 Conceptual diagram showing the link between biometeorological processes and time and
space scales

L1.3. Structure and Function

‘Form Follows Function’, Louis Henri Sullivan (1856-1924), architect

‘Form follows function―that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one,
joined in a spiritual union’, Frank Lloyd Wright (1869-1959), protégé’ of Louis Henri
Sullivan and architect

On walking through the woods, one of the first impressions one draws is that a
forest is a structurally complex entity. If one is walking through a temperate hardwood or
tropical forest, one observes trees of multiple stature, age and species. Stopping and
looking upward into the canopy crown, one sees that many leaves are sunlit leaves, their
inclination angles are rather erect, they are rather thick and they tend to be arranged in
clumps (Parker, 1995). At eye-level, tree trunks, understory vines, saplings and shrubs
immediately come to view. Understory leaves are relatively thin and tend to be oriented
horizontally, to absorb as much light as possible, in the sun-dappled shade. Looking
downward one sees fresh and decomposing litter, soil, rocks, fallen logs, seedlings, herbs
and shrubs.

5
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Figure 3 A walk through the woods. Armstrong Redwoods State Preserve, Guerneville, CA. Ian
McCully, photo.
Walking through forests in seasonally dry climates, like the ponderosa pine
ecosystem of the western United States or oak woodland ecosystems in Mediterranean
climates, one observes a stand with fewer tree species, than a temperate or tropical forest.
The architecture of forest canopies in xeric environments is more complex due to
periodic fires and seasonal drought. Structurally, the forest canopy is a patch-work of
dense and clumped young trees, open spaces, tall and solitary old trees and a mat of
shrubs and herbs in and around gaps.

Unseen by the naked eye is functional complexity. As stomata open to allow CO2
to diffuse into the mesophyll, water is lost, as photosynthesis, respiration, stomatal
conductance and transpiration operate in concert with one another. Biophysics,
competition and natural selection act as governors on the ultimate rates of photosynthesis
and transpiration that a leaf can achieve; these processes interact to constrain leaf
morphology, photosynthetic capacity, stomatal conductance, leaf water potential, root-
shoot allocation and resource acquisition (e.g. nutrients and soil moisture).

Structural and functional complexity of a forest is not static. On visiting a forest

many times over a year, one will observe both gradual and dramatic transitions in
structure and function. During the winter, the forest may be leafless or dormant and
respiring. With the occurrence of spring comes a flush of growth. Rapid changes in
biological activity and structure occur as leaves expand, nodes elongate, roots grow and
reproductive organs emerge. Coincidently, photosynthetic capacity of leaves changes
rapidly during this period, as chloroplast with nitrogen-rich RUBP are constructed.
During the summer, gradual changes in canopy structure, maximum stomatal

6
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
conductance and physiological capacity occur as leaves age, experience water deficits,
acclimate, are eaten or drop due to prolonged drought. With the approach of autumn, the
face of the landscape changes yet again. Leaves re-translocate nitrogen back to stems,
their photosynthetic capacity diminishes, they senesce and they drop from the trees.

Understanding complexity in canopy structure and function are key to quantifying

carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of forest stands, information that is used in
models that predict and diagnose weather, climate, biogeochemical cycling and forest
dynamics. This is because many structural and functional properties of plant canopies
alter: 1) wind and turbulence within and above the canopy, by exerting drag; 2) the
interception and scattering of photons throughout the canopy; 3) the heat load on
leaves and the soil; 4) the physiological resistances to water and CO2 transfer and 5) the
biochemical capacity to consume or respire carbon dioxide.

Any study on canopy microclimate or mass and energy exchange is essentially

worthless, unless it is accompanied with information on canopy architecture, plant
structure and function. Such a folly would be equivalent to trying to study demographics
of a city without knowing the population. For example, how could you estimate the
water use of San Francisco without knowing the number of people, houses and toilets in
the city?

In this lecture we focus on the physical attributes of plant canopies and how they
relate to biometeorological variables and processes.

L1.4 Physical Attributes of Plant Canopies

Reviews on the topic of canopy structure define several specific terms (Parker, 1995).
Physiognomy is concerned with the shape of crowns. Architecture describes growth
patterns and forms of stems. Organization relates to the statistical distribution of canopy
components in time and space and texture refers to the crown units of the overstory. In a
broad sense, I define a plant canopy as an amalgam of herbs, shrubs, plants and
underlying soil that exists on a landscape.

Important attributes of a plant canopy that relate to mass and energy exchange, canopy
microclimate and ecosystem physiology and functioning include:

1) leaf area index of the canopy (the amount of leaf area per ground area);
2) shape and size of leaves (needles vs planar, projected vs surface area of needles and
shoot to total needle area);
3) vertical distribution of leaf area;
4) spatial distribution of leaves (are they dispersed in a random, clumped or regular
fashion?)
5) seasonal variation of leaf area (is the canopy evergreen or deciduous?)
6) leaf angle distribution (are leaves erect, planophile, spherical?; are they azimuthally
symmetric or asymmetric?)

7
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
7) canopy height (short and aerodynamically smooth vs tall and aerodynamically rough)
8) crown volume and shape (vertical and horizontal dimensions; conical, ellipsoidal,
spherical)
9) plant species (species number, functional types)
10) stem density (stems per hectare);
11) spatial distribution of plants (random, clumped, rows, regular);
12) photosynthetic pathway (C3, C4, CAM);
13) plant habit (deciduous/evergreen; woody/herb, annual/perennial)
14) age structure (disturbed/undisturbed, plantation, native, agriculture, even aged,
mixed aged)
15) exposure/acclimation (sunlit/shaded, thickness, clumping, angle);
16) woody biomass area index (silhouette woody biomass per unit area);
17) rooting depth, root architecture (fibrous, tap), accessible water and nutrient volume
18) history and type of disturbance (recent fires, logging, plowing, re-planting)

Different attributes of a plant canopy influence the state of the atmosphere and
components of mass and energy exchange in various ways.

Leaf size, shape and orientation affect:

1) the properties of the leaf boundary layer;

2) the reflectance and transmittance of light;
3) leaf’s energy balance;
4) Umbra and penumbra (full or partial shade);
5) Leaf or needle clumping;

Figure 4. Blue oak leaves (Quercus douglasii).

The thickness of the leaf boundary layer affects the rate diffusion of trace gas to and from
the leaf. The interception of light depends on leaf orientation, relative to the sun, and
how clumped the leaves or needles may be. If a leaf is big enough to block the solar disk,
as viewed by another leaf, full shade is cast. Otherwise the inferior leaf is exposed to
partial or penumbral shade. The optical properties of leaves affect how much intercepted
radiation is available for evaporating water, photosynthesis and heating a leaf. The
temperature of a leaf governs kinetic rates of many important biochemical processes like
photosynthesis, respiration, plus the production of secondary compounds like isoprene.

8
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Growth form and geometry of a canopy or group of plants affects mass and energy
exchange by how it traps photons, exerts drag and alters physiological functioning. Tall
plant stands are aerodynamically rougher, so turbulent mixing and transport is more
efficient. Tall plant stands also trap photons more efficiently, so they are optically
darker. This means they absorb more solar energy and hence have more energy
available to evaporate water and heat the air. Tall plants, on the other hand, exert a
stronger resistance to water transport through their xylem. So taller plants may impose
stronger physiological restraints on mass and energy exchange than may shorter plants.

The structure of a plant canopy is not static with time. It can vary over the course of a
year and over the course of the plant’s lifespan. Evergreeness and deciduousness are
two examples of seasonal behavior by plants. Evergreen shed older leaves after new
leaves unfold, so there is an annual cycling of foliage. On a shoot of a conifer, for
example, many years of needles will coexist. Their photosynthetic capacity diminishes
with age. We also know that the photosynthetic capacity of co-occurring deciduous and
evergreen plants of the same genus (e.g. Quercus) can differ by a factor of two, with
greater capacity being associated with the deciduous species.

Evergreen type often occurs in habitats where carbon assimilation is restricted by

unfavorable conditions, as in the boreal forest. But it can also occur in tropical regions
where there is essential little seasonality, hence no reason to become dormant and drop
leaves. Conifers also reside on soils with lower nutrient availability (Sprugel, 1989).

The deciduous type leaf is more productive and its dominance on the landscape is more
common when nutrients and water is plentiful. The seasonal pattern of having or
dropping leaves has dire impact on mass and energy exchange. The rates of sensible heat
and the reflectivity of a forest differ markedly if it has leaves or not.

Plant function, as identified by its photosynthetic pathway will affect its stomatal
conductance and the partitioning of energy into evaporating water and generating heat. It
will also affect the efficiency of photosynthesis.

A quantitative understanding about how plant functional and structural attributes affect
the canopy microclimate and mass and energy exchange can be gained by examining the
Conservation of Mass equation. A simplified version of the conservation of mass can
be used to demonstrate that the net flux density (moles m-2 s-1) of carbon dioxide or water
vapor between a forest and the atmosphere (F) can be estimated by integrating the
source-sink strength with respect to height (S(z)):
h
F   S ( z )z (1
0

This assumption is valid as long as the forest is horizontally homogeneous and the
environmental conditions are not varying.

9
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
Conceptually, the source-sink strength of vegetation is proportional to leaf area density
(a(z)) and the differences between the scalar concentration in the atmosphere (Ca)
adjacent to leaves and that inside the leaves (Ci). It is inversely proportional to the sum of
the aerodynamic (ra) and stomatal resistances (rs):

F (C ( z )  Ci )
 S ( z)  a ( z) (2
z ra  rs

For CO2, the daytime sink strength in a layer of canopy is determined by the balance
between a biochemical and physiologically-limited demand of leaves and the diffusional-
limited supply from the atmosphere and through the leaf boundary layer (Farquhar et al.,
1980).
Using Equation 1 as a framework, one can identify how physical and functional
attributes of single leaves, individual plants and plant stands impact carbon, water and
energy exchange through their impact on boundary layer (Ga) and surface
conductances (Gs), physiological sink capacity (Ci) and photon transport through leaf
mesophyll and canopy foliage (P(0), the probability of beam penetration) (Table 1). As
this course develops over the course of this semester we focus on much of the material
presented in this table in greater detail.

Table 1 presents a summary of key leaf and plant characteristics, their attributes
and how these two features impact mass and energy exchange of plant canopies and
affect the local microclimate.

Table 1 Structural and functional attributes of leaves, plants and plant stands and their impact on carbon,
water and energy fluxes (Baldocchi et al., 2002; Horn, 1971; Nobel, 1999; Norman, Campbell, 1989; Ross,
1980). Ga: aerodynamic conductance; Gs: surface conductance; P(0): light transmission through a leaf or
canopy; : albedo or reflectivity; Ci: biochemical capacity

Characteristic Structural or Functional Primary Impacts on

Attribute Carbon, Water and
Energy Fluxes
Leaves

Photosynthetic pathway C3,C4,CAM, maximal stomatal Ci , Gs

conductance
Leaf size/shape Needle/planar/ shoot; Ga, P(0)
projected/surface area,
penumbra/umbra
Leaf inclination angle Spherical, erectophile, P(0)
distribution planophile
Leaf azimuthal angle Symmetric/asymmetric P(0)
distribution
Exposure Sunlit/shaded; acclimation Ci, Gs,
Optical properties Reflectance,transmittance, 
emittance

10
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
Leaf thickness Photosynthetic capacity, supply Ci ,Gs, 
of CO2 to chloroplast, optical
properties, Stomatal
conductance capacity
Stomatal distribution Amphistomatous/hypostomatous Gs

Plants/Trees

Crown volume shape Cone, ellipse, cylinder P(0), Ga

Plant species monoculture, mixed stand, P(0), Ga, Gs, Ci
functional type
Spatial distribution of Random, clumped, regular P(0)
leaves
Plant habit Evergreen/deciduous; woody Ga, Gs,
herbaceous; annual/perennial
Plant height Short (< 0.10 m) Ga, 
tall (> 10 m)
Rooting depth Accessible water and nutrients, Gs
plant water relations
Leaf area/sapwood ratio Hydraulic Conductivity Gs, Ci

Forest Stand

Leaf area index Open, sparse, closed P(0), Gs, Ga

Vertical distribution of LAI Uniform, skewed Ga, P(0)
Seasonal variation of LAI Evergreen/deciduous; winter or Ga, Gs
drought deciduous
Age structure Disturbed/undisturbed; Ga, Gs, P(0)
plantation; agriculture; regrowth
Stem density Spatial distribution of plants Ga, 
Woody biomass index Amount of woody biomass Ga, P(0)
Topography Exposure, site history, water Ga, Gs
balance
Site history Fires, logging, plowing, re-
growth Ga,Gs,Ci, 

As we walk through the country-side it become readily obvious that different types of
ecosystems, growing in different climates have different structural properties. To get a

11
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
sense of how micrometeorological and plant canopy attributes of different ecosystems
compare, we draw on compiled lists by the author and assorted references (Breuer et al.,
2003; Myneni et al., 1997; Saugier et al., 2001).

Table 2 Summary of Plant Attributes

Parameter grass/ shrub Broad- savanna Broad- needle

cereal leaved crop leaved leaved
forest forest
LAI 0-5 1-7 0-6 0-7 3-7 1-10
fraction of 1.0 0.2-0.6 0.1-1 0.2-0.4 >0.8 >0.7
ground
cover
understory - - - 0-5 0-2 0-2
LAI
leaf normal erecto uniform uniform uniform/ uniform/ uniform/
orientation phile erectophi planophile/ planophile/
le clumped clumped
fraction of - 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.15-20 0.15-0.20
stems
leaf size (m) 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.01
crown size 4 by 4 10 by 10 7 by 7

Table 3 Survey of Biophysical parameters, Saugier et al. 2001, Breuer et al. 2003. zo is aerodynamic
roughness length.

biome albedo Height (m) Zo(m) LAI max Rooting

Depth
Tropical 0.12-0.14 30-50 2-2.2 4-7.5 1-8
forests
Temperate 0.1-0.18 15-50 1-3 3-15 0.5-3
forests
Boreal forests 0.1-0.3 2-20 1-3 1-6 0.5-1
Arctic tundra 0.2-0.8 < 0.5 < 0.05 0-3 0.4-0.8
Mediterranean 0.12-0.2 0.3-10 0.03-0.5 1-6 1-6
shrubland
Crops 0.1-0.2 variable variable 4 0.2-1.5
Tropical 0.07-0.4 0.3-9 variable 0.5-4 0.5-2
savanna
Temperate 0.15-0.25 0.1-1 0.02-0.1 1-3 0.5-1.5
grassland
desert 0.2-0.4 < 0.5 < 0.05 1 0.2-15
- -

12
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Table 4 Ecophysiological Parameters by Biome, Saugier et al. 2001., Breuer et al., 2003, gs is stomatal
conductance, ga is aerodynamic conductance, RUE is radiation use efficiency for photosynthesis.

biome Max gs ga Max CO2 Max CO2 RUE

flux, day flux, night
Units mol m-2 s-1 mol m-2 s-1 mol m-2 s-1 mol m-2 s-1 G(DM)/ MJ
(PAR)
Tropical 0.5-1 0-4 -25 5-8 0.9
forests
Temperate 0.5 1-4 -25 1-6 1
forests
Boreal forests 0.2 10 -12 0-4 0.3-0.5
Arctic tundra -0.5 to -2 1-2
Mediterranean 0.5-1 -12 to -15 6-7
shrubland
Crops 1.2 1-3 -40 2-8 1-1.5
Tropical 0.2-1 0.1-4 -4 to -25 2-5 0.4-1.8
savanna
Temperate 0.4-1 0.2-1.5 -13 to -20 0.5-4
grassland

Having a general knowledge of these features will be critical later in the course when we
draw on these features to compute rates of transpiration, evaporation and photosynthesis.

Points to Ponder:

Does biodiversity and species matter when considering plant microclimates and mass and
energy exchange?

How does the plant microclimate and mass and energy exchange differ by substituting an
evergreen forest with a deciduous forest?; by substituting a forest with a grassland?

How has the evolution of the Earth’s climate affected the evolution of plant physiognomy
and ecosystem structure and function? Does leaf size, for instance, correlate with water
balance and climate?

Summary

 Physical attributes of a canopy include leaf area index, canopy height, and leaf
size.
 Physiological attributes of a canopy include photosynthetic pathway, stomatal
distribution (amphi or hypostomatous)

13
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
 Structural and functional properties of plant canopies alter: 1) wind and
turbulence within and above the canopy, by exerting drag; 2) the interception
and scattering of photons throughout the canopy; 3) the heat load on leaves and
the soil; 4) the physiological resistances to water and CO2 transfer and 5) the
biochemical capacity to consume or respire carbon dioxide.
 The physical and physiological attributes of a canopy can vary in space (vertically
and horizontally) and in time (seasonally and decadally).

References/Bibliography

Baldocchi DD, Wilson KB, Gu L (2002) Influences of structural and functional

complexity on carbon, water and energy fluxes of temperate broadleaved
deciduous forest. Tree Physiology. 22, 1065-1077.
Breuer L, Eckhardt K, Frede H-G (2003) Plant parameter values for models in temperate
climates. Ecological Modelling 169, 237-293.
Horn HS (1971) The Adaptive Geometry of Trees Princeton Univeristy Press.
Myneni RB, Nemani RR, Running SW (1997) Estimation of global leaf area index and
absorbed par using radiative transfer models. Ieee Transactions on Geoscience
and Remote Sensing 35, 1380-1393.
Nobel PS (1999) Physicochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology Academic Press.
Norman JM, Campbell GS (1989) Canopy Structure. In: Plant Physiological Ecology.
Parker GG (1995) Structure and Microclimate of Forest Canopies. In: Forest Canopies,
pp. 73-106.
Ross J (1980) The Radiation Regime and Architecture of Plant Stands. Dr. W Junk, The
Hague.
Saugier B, Roy J, Mooney H (2001) Estimations of global terrestrial productivity:
converging toward a single number. In: Terrestrial Global Productivity (ed. J Roy
BS, HA Mooney), pp. 543-557. Academic Press.
Sprugel DG (1989) The Relationship of Evergreenness, Crown Architecture, and Leaf
Size. American Naturalist 133, 465-479.

L1.6 Educational Resources

Key Journal in the Field

Main Journals

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology

Boundary Layer Meteorology
Journal of Geophysical Research, Biogeosciences
Plant, Cell and Environment

Journals with Occasional Articles

14
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Global Change Biology

Biogeosciences
Journal of Applied Meteorology
Tree Physiology
Journal of Hydrology
Water Resources Research
Oecologia
Ecological Applications
Ecology
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Atmospheric Environment
International journal of Biometeorology

Key Web pages

Key Societies and Organizations with Activities in Biometeorology and Agricultural

and Forest Meteorology:

American Meteorological Society: http://www.ametsoc.org/AMS/

American Geophysical Union: http://www.agu.org/

Ecological Society of American: http://esa.sdsc.edu/

Physiological Ecology Section: http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/ecophys/

International Society of Biometeorology: http://www.es.mq.edu.au/ISB/

American Agronomy Society: http://www.agronomy.org/

International Society for Agrometeorology: http://www.agrometeorology.org/

World Meteorological Organization, Commission for Agricultural Meteorology:

http://www.wmo.ch/web/wcp/agm/agmp.html

Biospheric Aspects of the Hydrological Cylcle, IGBP: http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~bahc/

Canadian Society of Agricultural Meteorology: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~csam/

Key Text books, Biometeorology, Micrometeorology, Environmental Physics,

Ecophysiology, Ecohydrology.

Arya, S. P. 1988. Introduction to Micrometeorology. Academic Press.

Bonan, G. 2002. Ecological Climatology. Cambridge University Press

15
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
Campbell,G.S. and Norman, J.M. 1998. An Introduction to Environmental Biophysics.
Springer.

Eagleson P.S. 2002. Ecohydrology. Cambridge University Press.

Garratt, J.R. 1992. The Atmosphere Boundary Layer. Cambridge Press.

Grace, J. 1983. Plant-Atmosphere Relations. Chapman and Hall.

Jones, H.G. 1992. Plants and Microclimate. Cambridge Press

Kaimal, J.C. and J.J. Finnigan. 1994. Atmospheric Boundary Layer Flows: Their
Structure and Measurement. Oxford Press.

Larcher W. 1975. Physiological Plant Ecology. Springer-Verlag. Berlin. 252 pp.

Monteith, J.L. and M.H. Unsworth. 1990. Principles of Environmental Physics. E.A.
Arnold.

Nobel, P.S. 1991. Physiochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology. Academic Press

Oke, T.R. 1987. Boundary Layer Climates. Metheun.

Panofsky, H.A. and J.A. Dutton. 1984. Atmospheric Turbulence. Wiley and Sons, 397
pp.

Stull, R.B. 1988. An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology, Kluwer Academic

Publishers.

Rosenberg, N.J., B.L. Blad and S.B.Verma. 1983. Microclimate. J. Wiley and Sons.

Tindall, J.A. and J.R. Kunkel. 1999. Unsaturated Zone Hydrology for Scientists and
Engineers. Prentice Hall.624 pp.

Specialized Proceedings

Andreae, M.O. and D.S. Schimel. 1989. Exchange of Trace Gases between Terrestrial
Ecosystems and the Atmosphere. Dahlem Workshop. J. Wiley.

Barfield, B.J. and J.F. Gerber. 1979. Modification of the Aerial Environment of Plants.
ASAE Monograph. St. Joseph, MI

Brutsaert, W.H. 1982. Evaporation into the Atmosphere. D. Reidel Pub.

Ehleringer, J.R. and C.B. Field. 1993. Scaling Physiological Processes: Leaf to Globe.
Academic Press.

16
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Gash, JHC, C. Nobre, J. Roberts and R. Victoria. 1996. Amazonian Deforestation and
Climate. J. Wiley.

Grace, J, E.D. Ford and P.G. Jarvis. 1980. Plants and Their Atmospheric Environment.
Blackwell. Oxford.

Griffiths, J.F (eds). 1994. Handbook of agricultural meteorology. New York : Oxford
University Press, 1994

Hutchison, B.A. and B.B. Hicks. 1985. Forest-Atmosphere Interactions. D. Reidel.

Moore, B. and D.S. Schimel. 1992. Trace Gases and the Biosphere. NCAR.

Noormets Phenology book

Ross, J. 1981. The Radiation Regime and Architecture of Plant Stands. Dr. Junk, The
Hague.

Roy, J., Saugier, B. Mooney, H. 2001. Terrestrial Global Productivity. Academic Press.

Steffen, W.L. and O.T. Denmead. 1988. Flow and Transport in the Natural Environment:
Advances and Applications. Springer-Verlag.

Sharkey, T.D., E.A. Holland and H.A. Mooney. 1991. Trace Gas Emission by Plants.
Academic Press.

Tenhunen, J. and P. Kabat. 1999. Integrating Hydrology, Ecosystem Dynamics and

Biogeochemistry in Complex Landscapes. Dahlem Konferenzen

Valentini Carbo Europe Book

Varlet-Grancher, C., R. Bonhomme and H. Sinoquet. 1993. Crop Struction and Light
Microclimate. INRA, France.

Von Caemmerer, S. 2000. Biochemical models of leaf photosynthesis. CSIRO

Publishing.

Woodward, I. 1986. Climate and Plant Distributions. Cambridge

Methods

Fritschen, L.J. and L.W. Gay. 1979. Environmental Instrumentation. Springer Verlag.

Hall, D.O. et al. 1993. Photosynthesis and Production in a Changing Environment: a

Field and Laboratory Manual. Chapman and Hall.

17
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction

Matson, P.A. and R.C. Harriss. 1995. Biogenic Trace Gases: Measuring Emissions from
Soil and Water. Blackwell.

Pearcy, R.W., J. Ehleringer, H.A. Mooney and P.W. Rundel. 1985. Plant Physiological
Ecology: Field Methods and Instrumentation. Chapman Hall.

Classic Books

Baver, L.D., W.H. Gardner and W.R. Gardner. 1972. Soil Physics. John Wiley and Sons.
New York. 497 pp.

Brooks, F.A. 1960. Physical Microclimatology. University of California, Davis.

Budyko, M.I. 1974. Climate and Life. Academic Press.

deVries, D.A. and N.H. Afgan. 1975. Heat and Mass Transfer in the Biosphere. John
Wiley and Sons

Geiger, R. 1961. The Climate Near the Ground. Harvard University Press.

Haugen et al. 1973. Workshop on Micrometeorology, American Meteorological Society,

Boston

Lowry, W.P. 1969. Weather and Life: an Introduction to Biometeorology.

Lumley, J.L. and H.A. Panofsky. 1964. The Structure of Atmospheric Turbulence. John
Wiley and Son. New York.

Monin, A.S. and A.M. Yaglom. 1975. Statistical Hydrodynamics. MIT Press. Cambridge.

Monteith, J.L. 1975. Vegetation and the Atmosphere, I, Academic Press. London.

Monteith, J.L. 1975. Vegetation and the Atmosphere, II, Academic Press, London

Munn, R.E. 1966. Descriptive Micrometeorology. Academic Press. New York.

Pasquill, F.A. 1974. Atmospheric Diffusion. Wiley.

Rose, CW. 1966. Agricultural Physics. Pergamon Press. 230 pp.

Sestak, Z., J. Catsky and P.G. Jarvis. 1971. Plant Photosynthetic Production: Manual of
Methods. Dr. W Junk, The Hague.

Setlik et al. 1970. Prediction and measurement of Photosynthetic Productivity. Pudoc.

18
ESPM 129, Biometeorology, Dennis Baldocchi Instructor
Lecture 1, Introduction
Sutton, O.G. 1953. Micrometeorology. McGraw-Hill.

19