Response to Comment on "Unexpected reversal of C3 versus C4 grass response to elevated CO2 during a 20-year field experiment"

Peter B Reich; Sarah E Hobbie; Tali D Lee; Melissa A Pastore

doi:10.1126/science.aau8982

Response to Comment on "Unexpected reversal of C₃ versus C₄ grass response to elevated CO₂ during a 20-year field experiment"

Science. 2018 Sep 14;361(6407):eaau8982. doi: 10.1126/science.aau8982.

Authors

Peter B Reich^{1

2}, Sarah E Hobbie³, Tali D Lee⁴, Melissa A Pastore³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA. [email protected].
² Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW 2753, Australia.
³ Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA.
⁴ Department of Biology, University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, WI 54701, USA.

PMID: 30213887
DOI: 10.1126/science.aau8982

Abstract

Nie and colleagues suggest a key role for interannual climate variation as an explanation for the temporal dynamics of an unexpected 20-year reversal of biomass responses of C₃-C₄ grasses to elevated CO₂ However, we had already identified some climate-dependent differences in C₃ and C₄ responses to eCO₂ and shown that these could not fully explain the temporal dynamics we observed.

Publication types

Comment

MeSH terms

Biomass
Carbon Dioxide*
Climate
Climate Change
Poaceae*

Substances

Carbon Dioxide