Next Article in Journal
Anthropogenic Impacts in the Lower Stratosphere: Scale Invariant Analysis
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of a New Radiation Scheme on Simulated Climate in the Global–Regional Integrated SysTem Model under Varying Physical Parameterization Schemes
Previous Article in Journal
Assessing the Potential for Photochemical Reflectance Index to Improve the Relationship between Solar-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence and Gross Primary Productivity in Crop and Soybean
Previous Article in Special Issue
Causes of Summer Ozone Pollution Events in Jinan, East China: Local Photochemical Formation or Regional Transport?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Atmosphere
Volume 15
Issue 4
10.3390/atmos15040464
atmosphere-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Intermittent Exposure Regime Did Not Alter the Crop Yield and Biomass Responses to an Elevated Ozone Concentration

by
Xiaoke Wang
1,2,*,
Danhong Zhang
1,2,
Sisi Tong
3,
Binbin Huang
1,2,
Shuai Zhang
4,
Xu Sun
1,
Hongxing Zhang
1,
Wuxing Wan
4 and
Feixiang Zheng
5
1
State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3
School of Ecology and Environment, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China
4
College of Life Sciences, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang 050016, China
5
Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2024, 15(4), 464; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15040464
Submission received: 23 February 2024 / Revised: 4 April 2024 / Accepted: 4 April 2024 / Published: 9 April 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ozone Pollution and Effects in China)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The intermittent ozone (O3) exposure of crops to alternating high and low concentrations is common in fields, but its impact on crop production has not been thoroughly investigated. In this study, two widely planted and O3-sensitive crops, winter wheat and soybean, were intermittently exposed to elevated O3 concentrations in open-top chambers. The results showed that the winter wheat and soybean yields significantly decreased with O3 exposure (AOT40, cumulative hourly O3 concentration above 40 ppb) (p < 0.001). The relative yield losses were 0.99% per AOT40 for winter wheat and 1.2% per AOT40 for soybean, respectively. The responses of the crop biomasses to elevated O3 concentrations were lower than that of crop yield. Although the O3-induced crop yield and biomass losses under continuous O3 exposure were greater than those under intermittent O3 exposure, the differences were not statistically significant. Therefore, we can conclude that the effects of elevated O3 concentrations on crops are closely related to the exposure dose but not significantly related to the temporal distribution of elevated O3 concentrations. This study improves our understanding of how crop production responds to intermittent O3 exposure.

1. Introduction

Ozone (O3), a widely distributed air pollutant, has significant negative impacts on human health, crop yields, and visibility. Due to substantial efforts to reduce the emissions of O3 precursor gases such as nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons, the O3 concentrations over Europe and North America have slightly decreased or plateaued since 2000 [1,2,3,4,5]. However, the O3 concentrations in eastern Asia continued to increase after 2000 [6,7,8]. In China, with rapid economic growth and increasing NOx emissions, O3 concentrations have been increasing significantly. Xu et al. [9] reported that the summer O3 concentrations at the Shangdianzi background site in North China increased at rates of more than 2%/yr during 2004–2016. The warm-season daily maximum 8 h average (MDA8) O3 levels increased by 2.4 ppb (5.0%)/yr, with more than 90% of the sites showing positive trends and 30% exhibiting trends greater than 3.0 ppb/yr [7]. O3-induced leaf injuries have frequently been observed in and around Beijing, North China [10,11,12], indicating that high O3 exposure has caused significant damage to plants in China. Many experiments have confirmed that staple crops worldwide, such as wheat, soybean, rice, and maize, are O3-sensitive [13,14,15]. The O3-induced global crop losses are estimated at 277 Tg, and the global annual crop yield is estimated to be reduced by 12.4%, 7.1%, 4.4%, and 6.1% for soybean, wheat, rice, and maize, respectively, due to elevated O3 concentrations [14]. Crop losses induced by elevated O3 concentrations have attracted particular attention in China, because any reduction in crop production in China might threaten global food security. The most recent estimates showed that the national mean relative yield losses induced by O3 in China were 11.45–19.74%, 7.59–9.29%, 0.07–3.35%, and 6.51–9.92% for wheat, rice, maize, and soybean, respectively, from 2010 to 2017 [16]. This shows that mitigating the impact of increasing O3 concentrations is crucial to increase global crop supplies.
At present, the assessment of crop losses caused by O3 has mostly been carried out through dose–response relationships. Available investigations have shown that crop losses have a good correlation with metrics of O3 exposure, such as AOT40, which is one of most widely used metrics [17,18,19]. However, this knowledge on the impact of O3 on crops is derived from experiments in which crops are continuously exposed to target O3 concentrations. However, the concentration of O3 in the atmosphere is not continuously increasing but exhibits different patterns, because the generation of ozone is influenced by many factors. O3 is photochemically produced through the oxidation of carbon monoxide, methane, and nonmethane hydrocarbons in the presence of nitrogen oxides [20]. The ambient O3 concentrations fluctuate depending on weather conditions and more readily form on warm, sunny days when the air is stagnant. Along with temporal variations in sun light, ambient O3 concentrations exhibit two temporal patterns: one is a significant diurnal variation in O3 concentrations that increases from morning, reaches a peak after noon, and then decreases [21]; the other is a sequential alternation on days in which high and low O3 concentrations occur depending on sunny and cloudy skies, respectively [22,23]. The temporal variation in O3 concentration is likely to alter the impact of O3 on plants. To improve estimates of crop losses or explore safeguards to crop production, it is essential to understand how crops respond to these patterns of O3 exposure. A previous study revealed differences in crop losses between crops that are exposed to O3 diurnal variation and a constant O3 concentration [24]. However, how plants respond to sequential exposure to different O3 concentrations (i.e., intermittent O3 exposure) has been investigated less.
When unfavorable conditions occur, plants can adjust their metabolism to modulate their growth and development via defense and homeostasis pathways to resist and adapt to environmental stresses. Plants’ resilience to environmental stress is determined by acclimation not only to stress but also to recovery after the stress is relieved. As stress ceases, plants can show growth patterns of partial, full, or compensatory recovery. Available reports show that plants can recover from drought [25], flooding [26], and metal pollution [27]. O3 entering plant leaves through stomata can trigger a reaction chain involving reactive oxygen species (ROS), which causes lipid peroxidation to damage the cell membrane, biochemical metabolism processes, and growth. With an increasing O3 concentration, the damage becomes more serious. When plants are exposed to low O3 concentrations, the damage might be minor or even hermetic [28]. Under cloudy and rainy weather conditions, which are not conducive to forming O3 in the air due to a lack of ultraviolet radiation [29,30], crops can not only avoid the impact of high O3 concentrations but also recover from previous stress from high O3 concentrations. O3 exposure can thus be viewed as a sequential stress, in which both high O3 concentrations and low O3 concentration (i.e., intermittent exposure) alternatively impose distinct stressors. To date, information on O3-induced crop loss due to such intermittent exposure is limited. In this study, unlike in traditional continuous O3 exposure experiments, we carried out crop growth experiments with intermittent exposure to high O3 concentrations. The study aims at investigating whether the crop response to O3 was altered by different intermittent low-O3-exposure regimes.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Site

The experimental site was located 30 km north of downtown Beijing, China (40°12′ N, 116°08′ E). It has a typical temperate and monsoonal climate with four distinct seasons. The annual mean precipitation is 550.3 mm, and the mean air temperature is 11.8 °C [31].

2.2. O3 Exposure Facility

Open-top chambers (OTCs) for O3 exposure were established as previously described [32]. Nine cylindrical OTCs (2.5 m in height and 2 m in diameter, with an inside area of 3.14 m2), 2 m apart from each other, were made of an aluminum alloy frame that was covered with 2 mm transparent plastic (85% transparency). A rain cap was placed 25 cm above the frustum and attached on top of the OTCs to prevent rain and wind from entering the chamber while allowing ambient air to freely circulate. The difference in the average air temperature from 9:00 a.m. to 17:00 p.m. inside and outside the chamber was no more than 2 °C [33].
O3 was generated from pure hospital-grade oxygen using a high-voltage discharge method (CFG-140, Jinan Sankang Envi-tech, Jinan, China). Ambient air or O3-containing air delivered by a 750 W centrifugal blower was released through a 13 cm diameter three-way connector, which was placed in the center of each chamber with an aluminum tube. The O3 concentration in each chamber was monitored sequentially for 10 min using an automated time-sharing system connected to an ozone analyzer (Model 49i, Thermo Scientific, Thermo Fisher Scientific Ltd., Franklin, MA, USA), and all the data were stored in the analyzer. The Model 49i O3 analyzer was calibrated every month with a Model 49i-PS O3 analyzer, which is a transfer standard for the calibration of ozone analyzers (Model 49i-PS, Thermo Scientific, USA). The precision, response time, and span drift were 1.0 ppb, 20 s, and <1% per month for both O3 analyzers. When the O3 concentration within the OTC exceeded 10% of the target O3 concentration, a glass rotameter (LZB-2, Suzhou Chemical Instrument, Suzhou, China) was used to manually tune the flow of oxygen entering the O3 generator to achieve the target O3 concentration. Pretests showed that O3 concentrations were evenly distributed, both vertically and horizontally, within the OTCs.

2.3. Experimental Design

The OTCs were randomly assigned to each of the three O3 treatment groups: ambient O3 as the control, ambient plus 40 ppb O3, and ambient plus 80 ppb O3. For each O3 treatment, 3 replicates of the OTCs were used. Three temporal regimes of O3 exposure were established: continuous (CE, O3 exposure continuous), a 5-day cycle (5 dC, O3 exposure for 5 days, then interrupted for 5 days) and a 10-day cycle (10 dC, O3 exposure for 10 days, then interrupted for 10 days). These regimes were established by moving plant pots between the OTCs of the control group and those with elevated O3 concentrations. For example, in the 5 dC treatment, we placed the pots in an OTC with an elevated O3 concentration for 5 days and then moved these pots to the OTC of the control for 5 days. Afterwards, a new cycle was initiated until the crop ripened.

2.4. Crops and Management

In North China, the cropping system is maturations of two types of crops within a year. Winter wheat is sown in later autumn and harvested in the next early summer, after which soybean is sown in summer and harvested in later fall. Winter wheat and summer soybean plants were sown in plastic pots that were 30 cm in diameter and 30 cm high. The popular planted wheat cultivar Jing 411 (Triticum aestivum L. jing411) was selected. This cultivar is cold-tolerant and amenable to maturation [34]. Wheat plants were sown on 6 October 2020 and harvested on 28 May 2021. The soybean cultivar used was Jidou 12 (Glycine max (Linn.) Merr. Jidou12), which is widely planted in North China and matures early [35]. The soybeans were sown on 15 June 2021 and harvested on 15 October 2021.
All pots were filled with composite soil mixed with commercial organic soil. Eight grams of complex fertilizer was applied per pot. Other practices, such as irrigation and pesticide application, were carried out as necessary so that the crops could grow without stress from drought, insects, pests, or nutrient deficiency.
After the wheat and soybean plants were 10 cm high, the plant pots were transferred to the OTCs for O3 fumigation. For each treatment, at least 9 pots were used as replicates. Fumigation was carried out from 16 March until 20 May, when the leaves became yellow in winter wheat, and from 6 July until 19 October, when the leaves became yellow in soybean. The daily O3 fumigation time was from 9:00 a.m. to 17:00 p.m. The cumulative O3 exposure was described as AOT40, which was calculated as the cumulative hourly mean O3 concentration over 40 ppb during O3 fumigation (Table 1).

2.5. Harvest and Yield Measurements

Three individuals were harvested from each pot after the crop ripened. The roots, stems, leaves, and grains were separated, and their dry weights were determined as the root, stem, and leaf biomass and yields, respectively, after oven-drying at 70 °C to a constant weight.

2.6. Statistical Analyses

All statistical analyses were performed in R v 4.2.1 (R Core Team, 2022). To test whether biomass and yield responded differently to elevated O3 concentrations under different O3 exposure regimes, we fitted linear models with the lm function in the nlme package. In the models, root, stem, and leaf biomass and yield per individual plant were specified as response variables, while O3 effects were measured based on statistically significant (p) responses for each treatment, with O3 exposure doses (AOT40)er as independent factors. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from the slopes of the linear models were compared to determine whether there were significant differences in the effects of O3 on crop biomass and yield among the different treatments. If the 95% CIs overlap among the different treatments, it means that there is no significant difference in the response to AOT40 among the different treatments.

3. Results

3.1. Winter Wheat

An elevated O3 concentration significantly reduced the yield (grain weight) of winter wheat under the CE treatment (p < 0.05), significantly increased the yield under the 5 dC treatment (p < 0.1), and did not significantly influence the yield under the 10 dC treatment (Figure 1a). However, the 95% CI of the regression slopes of crop yield to AOT40 overlapped among the different treatments (Figure 1b), suggesting that intermittent exposure did not change the response of the winter wheat yield to O3 exposure. There were significant linear regressions between the relative yield and AOT40 for all the treatments as follows:
R Y = 1.20 − 0.0099   A O T 40   ( r 2 = 0.304 ,   p = 0.009 )  
Elevated O3 concentrations did not significantly influence the root, stem, leafor total biomass of winter wheat under the CE or 10 dC treatment (p > 0.05), but they did significantly increase the root (p < 0.05), stem (p < 0.1), leaf (p < 0.1), and total biomass (p < 0.1) under the 5 dC treatment (Figure 1c,e,g,i). However, the 95% CI of the regression slopes of the crop biomass to AOT40 overlapped among the different treatments, indicating that there was no significant difference in the responses of the biomass to O3 exposure among the different exposure regimes (Figure 1d,f,h,j) and suggesting that intermittent exposure (5 dC and 10 dC treatments) did not change the response of winter wheat biomass to O3 exposure.

3.2. Soybean

An elevated O3 concentration significantly reduced the yield (grain weight) of soybean plants under CE (p < 0.001) and 10 dC (p < 0.01) but did not significantly influence the yield under the 5 dC treatment (Figure 2a). However, the 95% CI of the regression slopes of the crop yield to AOT40 overlapped among the different treatments (Figure 2b), suggesting that intermittent exposure did not change the response of soybean yield to O3 exposure. There were significant linear regressions between the relative yield and AOT40 for all the treatments as follows:
R Y = 0.985 − 0.012   A O T 40   ( r 2 = 0.34 ,   p = 0.007 )
Elevated O3 concentrations significantly reduced the root (p < 0.01 and p < 0.1), stem (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05), and total biomass (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01) of soybean plants under CE and 10 dC treatment and the stem biomass (p < 0.1) under 5 dC treatment but did not significantly influence the root or total biomass (Figure 2c,e). However, the 95% CI of the regression slopes of the crop biomass to AOT40 overlapped among the different treatments, indicating that there was no significant difference in the responses of biomass to O3 exposure among the different exposure regimes (Figure 2d,f) and suggesting that intermittent exposure (5 dC and 10 dC treatments) did not change the response of the soybean biomass to O3 exposure.

4. Discussion

Our experiments clearly showed that elevated O3 concentrations could significantly reduce the crop yield for both winter wheat and soybean plants, which is consistent with the findings of previous studies conducted in China [36,37], as well as throughout the world, including countries such as the USA, the UK, France, Italy, India, and Japan [38,39]. This study revealed that the effects of O3 on crop yield and biomass were dose-dependent, as shown by the significant linear regressions between the relative yield and AOT40 for all treatments (Equations (1) and (2)) [40,41]. A significant reduction in crop yield only occurred when the O3 exposure dose exceeded a certain threshold value. Under high O3 exposure doses, such as that during continuous exposure to O3 (in the CE treatment in this study, AOT40 = 43.6 and 38.68 ppm for wheat and soybean, respectively), the crop yield significantly decreased for both wheat and soybean. Under low O3 exposure, such as that during intermittent exposure to O3 (5 dC and 10 dC treatments in this study, AOT40 = 23.42–23.43 ppm for wheat and 21.77–23.65 ppm for soybean), the crop yield did not decrease significantly (p > 0.1). Interestingly, under the 5 dC treatment, the wheat yield increased significantly under O3 exposure (40 ppb plus fumigation), which is generally referred to as the hermetic effect [28]. Although elevated O3 concentrations are undoubtedly toxic, there is increasing evidence that low O3 concentrations might have beneficial effects. Similar results have been reported in experiments in which pretreatment with trace metallic elements was used to stimulate defense mechanisms and induce tolerance of other stress factors, such as osmotic stress, salinity, drought, low temperature, and pathogen attacks, increasing plant production [42,43]. Additionally, cabbage plants (Brassica oleracea var. capitata f, alba) that were subjected to 70 ppb O3 treatment had an increased diameter of rosettes and number of leaves after 3 and 7 weeks [44]. Under these conditions, O3 exposure ceased to cause compensatory growth, and subsequently, the plant growth not only recovered but also improved. To confirm the universality of the compensatory growth effect, further research is needed to investigate plant growth under different O3 exposure intensities, durations, recovery times, etc.
The effects of elevated O3 concentrations on biomass varies with crop type and O3 dose. In the present study, the root, stem, leaf and total biomass of wheat did not significantly decrease under the 10 dC treatment or CE treatment at elevated O3 concentrations but increased under the 5 dC treatment. The root, stem, and total biomass of soybean plants significantly decreased under the 10 dC and CE treatments at elevated O3 concentrations but did not significantly decrease under the 5 dC treatment. Taken together, these findings imply that, under elevated O3 concentrations, the crop biomass decreases less than the crop yield, and this inconsistency in the magnitude of decline may correspond to a growth strategy for plants under O3 stress.
In previous studies, crops were often exposed to a constant concentration of O3. However, in fields, O3 concentrations vary on a diurnal scale, with O3 levels peaking after noon and over multiple days, with alterations occurring between sunny days with high O3 concentrations and cloudy or rainy days with low O3 concentrations. Wang et al. [24] reported that under the same O3 exposure dose, O3 caused more crop yield losses under a diurnal fluctuating O3 regime than under exposure to a constant O3 concentration, suggesting that crops are damaged more by short durations of very high O3 concentrations than by constant, moderate O3 concentrations. Over multiple days, periods of high O3 concentration are often separated by periods of low O3 concentration. Crops are exposed to cycles of high and low O3 concentrations. Even if the O3 concentration or cumulative dose is the same, the stomatal absorption flux may be different, which can cause different plant responses. The damage of O3 to plants is influenced by the actual absorption flux of stomata, and many studies have shown a good correlation between O3 flux and photosynthetic or yield losses [37,45]. When the O3 concentration exceeds a certain threshold, the stomatal ozone flux increases as the O3 concentration rises [37], leading to photosynthesis and growth loss. But under certain conditions, O3 exposure can reduce stomatal conductance, leading to a lower stomatal O3 flux [46], which helps reduce the oxidative damage of O3 to plants. Simultaneously, stomatal closure can lead to the diffusion of carbon dioxide in the stomatal intercellular cavities, thus limiting photosynthesis [47]. Unfortunately, in our study, the O3 flux is not estimated for assessing crop yield and biomass losses because of a lack of measurements of the air temperature, humidity, as well as leaf conductance parameter within each OTC, which are essential to calculate the O3 flux within the OTCs. Furthermore, a series of processes, such as detoxification, elimination, and recovery, occur within organisms or populations after the stress on the crops is relieved [48], and these processes could even mitigate crop damage during periods of high O3 exposure. However, more investigations are required into this topic.
Unlike traditional experiments in which crops are continuously exposed to elevated O3 concentrations over an entire growing season, we applied different frequencies of high and low O3 exposure. The effects of the temporal regime of O3 exposure on crops were assessed by comparing the linear relationships of the crop yield and biomass with the O3 exposure dose AOT40. The 95% confidence intervals of the regression slopes of the crop yield and biomass to AOT40 overlapped among the different treatments, indicating that the responses of crop yield and biomass to O3 exposure were similar, regardless of whether the continuous or intermittent O3 regime was applied. This finding implies that crops’ response to O3 is related to the exposure dose but not to the exposure regime.
Other studies have shown that short-duration and acute O3 exposure does not necessarily lead to a reduction in crop yield or grain weight [49]. For some species or genotypes, plants grown under chronic O3 exposure can exhibit altered antioxidant capacity [50]. Researchers have reported differences in the sensitivity and tolerance of crop cultivars and the responses of different traits in plants to elevated O3 levels [51]. In the present study, crops’ responses to elevated O3 concentrations under intermittent exposure were the same as those under continual exposure for the same cumulative dose. The reason for this might be the damage of O3 to the crop being influenced by the actual O3 flux absorbed by stomata and the detoxification and recovery ability of crops. To confirm this explanation, it is necessary to measure the changes in stomatal O3 flux and crops’ morphological and physiological parameters during and after O3 exposure, especially to investigate how the timing, duration, and sequence of multiple periods of O3 episodes affect biological systems.

5. Conclusions

Crops’ exposure to ambient O3 often occurs over numerous days with periods of high concentrations interrupted by periods of low O3 concentrations. In this study, we assessed the impact of O3 exposure on the crop yield and biomass under two different intermittent exposure regimes. Our results showed that there were significant relationships between winter wheat and soybean yields and the O3 exposure dose (AOT40). However, these relationships were not significantly altered by continuous or intermittent exposure, suggesting that the temporal distribution of elevated O3 concentrations was less important than the exposure dose for assessing the effects of elevated O3 concentrations. This is the first study to investigate the effects of intermittent O3 exposure on crops. In these preliminary results, we measured the crop yield and biomass at harvest, but several important indicators and processes that are pertinent to intermittent exposures were not measured, such as the crop recovery when the O3 exposure ceased and crop resistance or tolerance when pre-exposure occurred. Therefore, additional studies are needed to investigate physiological, morphological, and ecological responses during and after O3 exposure under different frequencies and amplitudes of high-O3 episodes.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.W.; methodology, X.W.; software, X.W., D.Z. and B.H.; validation, X.W., D.Z., S.T. and B.H.; formal analysis, X.W., D.Z. and S.T.; investigation, D.Z., S.T. and S.Z.; resources, X.W., X.S., H.Z., W.W. and F.Z.; data curation, X.W., D.Z., S.T. and S.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, X.W.; writing—review and editing, X.W., D.Z. and B.H.; visualization, X.W., D.Z. and B.H.; supervision, X.W., X.S., H.Z., W.W. and F.Z.; project administration, X.W.; funding acquisition, X.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 31971509 And The APC was funded by Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.

Acknowledgments

We thank Yingfu Bai from the local village for managing the experiment. The authors also acknowledge the constructive reading and suggestions given by the anonymous reviewers.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cooper, O.R.; Gao, R.-S.; Tarasick, D.; Leblanc, T.; Sweeney, C. Long-term ozone trends at rural ozone monitoring sites across the United States, 1990–2010. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2012, 117, D22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cristofanelli, P.; Scheel, H.E.; Steinbacher, M.; Saliba, M.; Azzopardi, F.; Ellul, R.; Fröhlich, M.; Tositti, L.; Brattich, E.; Maione, M.; et al. Long-term surface ozone variability at Mt. Cimone WMO/GAW global station (2165 m a.s.l., Italy). Atmos. Environ. 2015, 101, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chang, K.-L.; Petropavlovskikh, I.; Cooper, O.R.; Schultz, M.G.; Wang, T. Regional trend analysis of surface ozone observations from monitoring networks in eastern North America, Europe and East Asia. Elem. Sci. Anthr. 2017, 5, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Derwent, R.G.; Manning, A.J.; Simmonds, P.G.; Spain, T.G.; O’Doherty, S. Long-term trends in ozone in baseline and European regionally-polluted air at Mace Head, Ireland over a 30-year period. Atmos. Environ. 2018, 179, 279–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Yan, Y.; Pozzer, A.; Ojha, N.; Lin, J.; Lelieveld, J. Analysis of European ozone trends in the period 1995–2014. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2018, 18, 5589–5605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, T.; Dai, J.; Lam, K.S.; Nan Poon, C.; Brasseur, G.P. Twenty-Five Years of Lower Tropospheric Ozone Observations in Tropical East Asia: The Influence of Emissions and Weather Patterns. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2019, 46, 11463–11470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lu, X.; Hong, J.; Zhang, L.; Cooper, O.R.; Schultz, M.G.; Xu, X.; Wang, T.; Gao, M.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, Y. Severe Surface Ozone Pollution in China: A Global Perspective. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2018, 5, 487–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sun, L.; Xue, L.; Wang, Y.; Li, L.; Lin, J.; Ni, R.; Yan, Y.; Chen, L.; Li, J.; Zhang, Q.; et al. Impacts of meteorology and emissions on summertime surface ozone increases over central eastern China between 2003 and 2015. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2019, 19, 1455–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Xu, X.; Lin, W.; Xu, W.; Jin, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, X.; Ma, Z.; Dong, Y.; Ma, Q.; et al. Long-term changes of regional ozone in China: Implications for human health and ecosystem impacts. Elem. Sci. Anthr. 2020, 8, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, X.; Manning, W.; Feng, Z.; Zhu, Y. Ground-level ozone in China: Distribution and effects on crop yields. Environ. Pollut. 2007, 147, 394–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhang, W.; Feng, Z.; Wang, X.; Niu, J. Elevated ozone negatively affects photosynthesis of current-year leaves but not previous-year leaves in evergreen Cyclobalanopsis glauca seedlings. Environ. Pollut. 2014, 184, 676–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Feng, Z.; Büker, P.; Pleijel, H.; Emberson, L.; Karlsson, P.E.; Uddling, J. A unifying explanation for variation in ozone sensitivity among woody plants. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Osborne, S.A.; Mills, G.; Hayes, F.; Ainsworth, E.A.; Büker, P.; Emberson, L. Has the sensitivity of soybean cultivars to ozone pollution increased with time? An analysis of published dose–response data. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2016, 22, 3097–3111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mills, G.; Sharps, K.; Simpson, D.; Pleijel, H.; Frei, M.; Burkey, K.; Emberson, L.; Uddling, J.; Broberg, M.; Feng, Z.; et al. Closing the global ozone yield gap: Quantification and cobenefits for multistress tolerance. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 4869–4893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Broberg, M.C.; Daun, S.; Pleijel, H. Ozone Induced Loss of Seed Protein Accumulation Is Larger in Soybean than in Wheat and Rice. Agronomy 2020, 10, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Li, D.; Shindell, D.; Ding, D.; Lu, X.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Y. Surface ozone impacts on major crop production in China from 2010 to 2017. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2022, 22, 2625–2638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Emberson, L.D.; Büker, P.; Ashmore, M.R.; Mills, G.; Jackson, L.S.; Agrawal, M.; Atikuzzaman, M.D.; Cinderby, S.; Engardt, M.; Jamir, C.; et al. A comparison of North American and Asian exposure–response data for ozone effects on crop yields. Atmos. Environ. 2009, 43, 1945–1953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sicard, P.; Serra, R.; Rossello, P. Spatiotemporal trends in ground-level ozone concentrations and metrics in France over the time period 1999–2012. Environ. Res. 2016, 149, 122–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Zhu, Z.; Sun, X.; Zhao, F.; Meixner, F.X. Ozone concentrations, flux and potential effect on yield during wheat growth in the Northwest-Shandong Plain of China. J. Environ. Sci. 2015, 34, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, C.; Shi, K. A review on methodology in O3-NOx-VOC sensitivity study. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 291, 118249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhao, S.; Yu, Y.; Yin, D.; He, J.; Liu, N.; Qu, J.; Xiao, J. Annual and diurnal variations of gaseous and particulate pollutants in 31 provincial capital cities based on in situ air quality monitoring data from China National Environmental Monitoring Center. Environ. Int. 2016, 86, 92–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Xu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Fu, J.S.; Zheng, S.; Wang, W. Process analysis of typical summertime ozone episodes over the Beijing area. Sci. Total Environ. 2008, 399, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Tan, Z.; Ma, X.; Lu, K.; Jiang, M.; Zou, Q.; Wang, H.; Zeng, L.; Zhang, Y. Direct evidence of local photochemical production driven ozone episode in Beijing: A case study. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 800, 148868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Wang, X.; Zheng, Q.; Feng, Z.; Xie, J.; Feng, Z.; Ouyang, Z.; Manning, W.J. Comparison of a diurnal vs. steady-state ozone exposure profile on growth and yield of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) in open-top chambers in the Yangtze Delta, China. Environ. Pollut. 2008, 156, 449–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Rivas, R.; Frosi, G.; Ramos, D.G.; Pereira, S.; Benko-Iseppon, A.M.; Santos, M.G. Photosynthetic limitation and mechanisms of photoprotection under drought and recovery of Calotropis procera, an evergreen C3 from arid regions. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 118, 589–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Yeung, E.; van Veen, H.; Vashisht, D.; Sobral Paiva, A.L.; Hummel, M.; Rankenberg, T.; Steffens, B.; Steffen-Heins, A.; Sauter, M.; de Vries, M.; et al. A stress recovery signaling network for enhanced flooding tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, E6085–E6094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Chmielowska-Bąk, J.; Deckert, J. Plant Recovery after Metal Stress—A Review. Plants 2021, 10, 450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Agathokleous, E.; Araminiene, V.; Belz, R.G.; Calatayud, V.; De Marco, A.; Domingos, M.; Feng, Z.; Hoshika, Y.; Kitao, M.; Koike, T.; et al. A quantitative assessment of hormetic responses of plants to ozone. Environ. Res. 2019, 176, 108527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jianhui, B. Study on surface O3 chemistry and photochemistry by UV energy conservation. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 2010, 1, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Akagi, S.K.; Yokelson, R.J.; Burling, I.R.; Meinardi, S.; Simpson, I.; Blake, D.R.; McMeeking, G.R.; Sullivan, A.; Lee, T.; Kreidenweis, S.; et al. Measurements of reactive trace gases and variable O3 formation rates in some South Carolina biomass burning plumes. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2013, 13, 1141–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Tong, L.; Sudebilige, F.Z.; Qiong, W.; Chunmei, G.; Fei, L.; Wei, W.; Baohui, Y.; Xiaoke, W. Stomatal ozone uptake modeling and comparative analysis of flux response relationships of winter wheat. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2012, 32, 2890–2899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zheng, F.; Wang, X.; Lu, F.E.I.; Hou, P.; Zhang, W.; Duan, X.; Zhou, X.; Ai, Y.; Zheng, H.U.A.; Ouyang, Z.; et al. Effects of elevated ozone concentration on methane emission from a rice paddy in Yangtze River Delta, China. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2011, 17, 898–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Li, L.; Manning, W.J.; Tong, L.; Wang, X. Chronic drought stress reduced but not protected Shantung maple (Acer truncatum Bunge) from adverse effects of ozone (O3) on growth and physiology in the suburb of Beijing, China. Environ. Pollut. 2015, 201, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Zhang, Q. Chinese Wheat Improvement and Pedigree Analysis; China Agriculture Press: Beijing, China, 2003; pp. 88–89. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  35. Yang, C.Y.; Zhang, M.C.; Zhao, S.J.; Wang, W.X. Study on breeding methods of a new soybean variety-Jidou12 with high protein and high yield. J. Hebei Agric. Univ. 2004, 27, 8–11. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, X.; Zhang, Q.; Zheng, F.; Zheng, Q.; Yao, F.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, W.; Hou, P.; Feng, Z.; Song, W.; et al. Effects of elevated O3 concentration on winter wheat and rice yields in the Yangtze River Delta, China. Environ. Pollut. 2012, 171, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Zhang, W.; Feng, Z.; Wang, X.; Liu, X.; Hu, E. Quantification of ozone exposure- and stomatal uptake-yield response relationships for soybean in Northeast China. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 599–600, 710–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Feng, Z.; Kobayashi, K.; Ainsworth, E.A. Impact of elevated ozone concentration on growth, physiology, and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): A meta-analysis. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2008, 14, 2696–2708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Morgan, P.B.; Ainsworth, E.A.; Long, S.P. How does elevated ozone impact soybean? A meta-analysis of photosynthesis, growth and yield. Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26, 1317–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Agyei, T.; Juráň, S.; Edwards-Jonášová, M.; Fischer, M.; Švik, M.; Komínková, K.; Ofori-Amanfo, K.K.; Marek, M.V.; Grace, J.; Urban, O. The Influence of Ozone on Net Ecosystem Production of a Ryegrass–Clover Mixture under Field Conditions. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Jurán, S.; Edwards-Jonásová, M.; Cudlín, P.; Zapletal, M.; Sigut, L.; Grace, J.; Urban, O. Prediction of ozone effects on net ecosystem production of Norway spruce forest. Iforest 2018, 11, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chmielowska, J.; Veloso, J.; Gutiérrez, J.; Silvar, C.; Díaz, J. Cross-protection of pepper plants stressed by copper against a vascular pathogen is accompanied by the induction of a defence response. Plant Sci. 2010, 178, 176–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Muszyńska, E.; Labudda, M. Dual Role of Metallic Trace Elements in Stress Biology—From Negative to Beneficial Impact on Plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rozpądek, P.; Ślesak, I.; Cebula, S.; Waligórski, P.; Dziurka, M.; Skoczowski, A.; Miszalski, Z. Ozone fumigation results in accelerated growth and persistent changes in the antioxidant system of Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata f. alba. J. Plant Physiol. 2013, 170, 1259–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Feng, Z.; Tang, H.; Uddling, J.; Pleijel, H.; Kobayashi, K.; Zhu, J.; Oue, H.; Guo, W. A stomatal ozone flux–response relationship to assess ozone-induced yield loss of winter wheat in subtropical China. Environ. Pollut. 2012, 164, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Holder, A.J.; Hayes, F. Substantial yield reduction in sweet potato due to tropospheric ozone, the dose-response function. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 304, 119209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Xu, Y.; Feng, Z.; Shang, B.; Dai, L.; Uddling, J.; Tarvainen, L. Mesophyll conductance limitation of photosynthesis in poplar under elevated ozone. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 657, 136–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Reinert, K.H.; Giddings, J.M.; Judd, L. Effects analysis of time-varying or repeated exposures in aquatic ecological risk assessment of agrochemicals. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2002, 21, 1977–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sawada, H.; Kohno, Y. Differential ozone sensitivity of rice cultivars as indicated by visible injury and grain yield. Plant Biol. 2009, 11, 70–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Gillespie, K.M.; Rogers, A.; Ainsworth, E.A. Growth at elevated ozone or elevated carbon dioxide concentration alters antioxidant capacity and response to acute oxidative stress in soybean (Glycine max). J. Exp. Bot. 2011, 62, 2667–2678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Singh, A.A.; Fatima, A.; Mishra, A.K.; Chaudhary, N.; Mukherjee, A.; Agrawal, M.; Agrawal, S.B. Assessment of ozone toxicity among 14 Indian wheat cultivars under field conditions: Growth and productivity. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2018, 190, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Atmosphere 15 00464 g001
Figure 1. The winter wheat yield (a) and root (c), stem (e), leaf (g), and total biomass (i) under different ozone concentrations and their responses (the 95% confidential interval of the slope of the regression relation between the crop biomass or yield to O3 exposure dose AOT40.slopes of the regression relation of yield or biomass of winter wheat yield (b), and root (d), stem (f), leaf (h), and total biomass (j) to ozone exposure dose AOT40) under different intermittent elevated ozone exposures (5 dC and 10 dC: crops were sequentially exposed for 5 and 10 days of elevated ozone concentration and then interrupted for 5 and 10 days, respectively. CE: crops were exposed continuously to an elevated ozone concentration). The significance levels: ** (p < 0.01), * (p < 0.05), ns (p ≥ 0.05).
Figure 1. The winter wheat yield (a) and root (c), stem (e), leaf (g), and total biomass (i) under different ozone concentrations and their responses (the 95% confidential interval of the slope of the regression relation between the crop biomass or yield to O3 exposure dose AOT40.slopes of the regression relation of yield or biomass of winter wheat yield (b), and root (d), stem (f), leaf (h), and total biomass (j) to ozone exposure dose AOT40) under different intermittent elevated ozone exposures (5 dC and 10 dC: crops were sequentially exposed for 5 and 10 days of elevated ozone concentration and then interrupted for 5 and 10 days, respectively. CE: crops were exposed continuously to an elevated ozone concentration). The significance levels: ** (p < 0.01), * (p < 0.05), ns (p ≥ 0.05).
Atmosphere 15 00464 g001
Atmosphere 15 00464 g002
Figure 2. The soybean yield (a) and root (c) and stem (e) under different ozone concentrations and their responses (the 95% confidential interval of the slopes of the regression relation between the crop biomass or yield of soybean yield (b) and the root (d) and stem (f) to ozone exposure dose AOT40) under different intermittent elevated ozone exposures (5 dC and 10 dC: crops were sequentially exposed for 5 and 10 days of elevated ozone concentration and then interrupted for 5 and 10 days, respectively. CE: crop was exposed continuously to elevated ozone concentration). The significance levels: *** (p < 0.001), * (p < 0.05), ns (p ≥ 0.05).
Figure 2. The soybean yield (a) and root (c) and stem (e) under different ozone concentrations and their responses (the 95% confidential interval of the slopes of the regression relation between the crop biomass or yield of soybean yield (b) and the root (d) and stem (f) to ozone exposure dose AOT40) under different intermittent elevated ozone exposures (5 dC and 10 dC: crops were sequentially exposed for 5 and 10 days of elevated ozone concentration and then interrupted for 5 and 10 days, respectively. CE: crop was exposed continuously to elevated ozone concentration). The significance levels: *** (p < 0.001), * (p < 0.05), ns (p ≥ 0.05).
Atmosphere 15 00464 g002
Table 1. Cumulative values of AOT40 for each treatment (ppm·h).
Table 1. Cumulative values of AOT40 for each treatment (ppm·h).
CropControl40 ppb80 ppb
5 dC10 dCCE5 dC10 dCCE
Winter wheat3.6014.4415.0525.5123.4323.4243.60
Soybean3.7111.6113.2519.9421.7723.6538.68
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, X.; Zhang, D.; Tong, S.; Huang, B.; Zhang, S.; Sun, X.; Zhang, H.; Wan, W.; Zheng, F. An Intermittent Exposure Regime Did Not Alter the Crop Yield and Biomass Responses to an Elevated Ozone Concentration. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 464. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15040464

AMA Style

Wang X, Zhang D, Tong S, Huang B, Zhang S, Sun X, Zhang H, Wan W, Zheng F. An Intermittent Exposure Regime Did Not Alter the Crop Yield and Biomass Responses to an Elevated Ozone Concentration. Atmosphere. 2024; 15(4):464. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15040464

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Xiaoke, Danhong Zhang, Sisi Tong, Binbin Huang, Shuai Zhang, Xu Sun, Hongxing Zhang, Wuxing Wan, and Feixiang Zheng. 2024. "An Intermittent Exposure Regime Did Not Alter the Crop Yield and Biomass Responses to an Elevated Ozone Concentration" Atmosphere 15, no. 4: 464. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15040464

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop