### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 1 June 2012 

## 9 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT S: OZONE EFFECTS ON VEGETATION AND ECOSY STEMS

9.1 Introduction

This chapter synthesizes and evaluates the relevant science to help form the scientific 

### 1 foundation for the review of a vegetation

- and ecologically

- based secondary NAAQS for 

### 2

O 3 . The secondary NAAQS are based on welfare effects. The Clean Air Act (CAA) 

### 3
definition of welfare effects includes, but is not limited to, effects on soils, water, 

### 4

wild life, vegetation, visibility, weather, and climate, as well as effects on materials, 

### 5 economic values, and personal comfort and well

- being. The effects of O 3 as a greenhouse 

### 6 gas and its direct effects on climate are discussed in Chapter 10 of this document. 

### 7

The intent of the ISA, according to the CAA, is to “accurately reflect the latest scientific 

### 8 knowledge expected from the presence of [a] pollutant in ambient air” (42 U.S.C.7408 

### 9 and 42 U.S.C.7409. This chapter of the ISA includes scientific research from 

### 10 biogeochemistry, soil science, plant physiology, and ecology conducted at multiple levels 

### 11 of biological organization (e.g., organ, organism, populat ion, community, ecosystem). 

### 12 Key information and judgments formerly found in the AQCDs regarding O 3 effects on 

### 13 vegetation and ecosystems are found in this chapter. This chapter of the O 3 ISA serves to 

### 14 update and revise Chapter 9 and AX9 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD ( U.S. EPA, 2006b )

. 

### 15

Numerous studies of the effects of O 3 on ve getation and ecosystems were reviewed in the 

### 16

2006 O 3 AQCD. That document concluded that the effects of ambient O 3 on vegetation 

### 17 and ecosystems appear to be widespread across the U.S., and experimental studies 

### 18 demonstrated plausible mechanisms for these eff ects. Ozone effect studies published 

### 19 from 2005 to July 2011 are reviewed in this document in the context of the previous O 3 

### 20 AQCDs. From 2005 to 2011, some areas have had very little new research published and 

### 21

the reader is referred back to sections of the 2006 O 3 AQCD for a more comprehensive 

### 22 discussion of those subjects. This chapter is focused on studies of vegetation and 

### 23 ecosystems that occur in the U.S. and that provide information on endpoints or processes 

### 24 most relevant to the review of the secondary s tandard. Many studies have been published 

### 25 about vegetation and ecosystems outside of the U.S. and North America, largely in 

### 26 Europe and Asia. This document includes discussion of studies of vegetation and 

### 27 ecosystems outside of North America only if those st udies contribute to the general 

### 28 understanding of O 3 effects across species and ecosystems. For example, studies outside 

### 29 North America are discussed that consider physiological and biochemical processes that 

### 30 contribute to the understanding of effects of O 3 across species. Also, ecosystem studies 

### 31

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 2 June 2012 outside of North America that contribute to the understanding of O 3 effects on general 

### 1 ecosystem processes are discussed in the chapter. 

### 2

Sections of this chapter first discuss exposure methods, followed by effects o n vegetation 

### 3 and ecosystems at various levels of biological organization and ends with policy

- relevant 

### 4 discussions of exposure indices and exposure

- response. Figure 9

- 1 is a simplified 

### 5 illustrative diagram of the major pathway through which O 3 enters plants and the major 

### 6 endpoints O 3 may affect. First, Section 9.2 presents a brief overview of various 

### 7 methodologies that have been, and continue to be, central to quantifying O 3 effects on 

### 8 vegetation (see AX9.1 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD for more detailed discussion) ( U.S. EPA, 

### 9

2006b ) . Section 9.3 through Section 9.4 begin with a discussion of effects at the cellular 

### 10

and subcellu lar level followed by consideration of the O 3 effects on plant and ecosystem 

### 11
processes ( Figure 9

- 1 ). In Section 9.3 , research is reviewed from the molecular to the 

### 12 biochemical and physiological levels in impacted plants, offering insight into the mode of 

### 13

action of O 3 . Section 9.4 provides a review of the effects of O 3 exposure on major 

### 14 endpoints at the whole plant scale including growth, reproduction, visible foliar injury 

### 15 and leaf gas exch ange in woody and herbaceous plants in the U.S., as well as a brief 

### 16

discussion of O 3 effects on agricultural crop yield and quality. Section 9.4 also integrates 

### 17

the effects of O 3 on individual plants in a discussion of available research for assessing 

### 18

the effect of O 3 on ecosystems, along with available studies that could inform 

### 19 assessments of various ecosystem services (See Section 9.4.1.2 ). The development of 

### 20

indices of O 3 exposure and dose modeling is discussed in Section 9.5 . Finally, exposure



### 21 response relationships for a number of tree species, native vegetation, and crop species 

### 22 and cultivars are reviewed, tabulated, and compared in Section 9.6 to form the basis for 

### 23 an assessment of the potential risk to vegetation from current ambient levels of O 3
. 

### 24

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 3 June 2012 Figure 9

- 1 An illustrative diagram of the major pathway through which ozone enters plants and the major endpoints that ozone may affect in plants and ecosystems.



## 9.2 Experimental Exposure Methodologies

9.2.1 Introduction

A variety of methods for studying plant response to O 3 exposures have b een developed 

### 1 over the last several decades. The majority of methodologies currently used have been 

### 2

discussed in detail in the 1996 O 3 AQCD and 2006 O 3 AQCD. This section will serve as 

### 3 a short overview of the methodologies and the reader is referred to the previous O 3 

### 4
AQCDs for more in

- depth discussion. 

### 5 O 3 

### exposure

O 3 

### uptake & physiology (Fig 9

- 2)

• Antioxidant metabolism up

- regulated

• Decreased photosynthesis

• Decreased stomatal conductance or sluggish stomatal response



### Effects on leaves

• Visible leaf injury

• Altered leaf production

• Altered leaf chemical composition



### Plant growth (Fig 9

- 8 )

• Decreased biomass accumulation

• Altered reproduction

• Altered carbon allocation

• Altered crop quality



### Belowground processes (Fig 9

- 8 )

• Altered litter production and decomposition

• Altered soil carbon and nutrient cycling

• Altered soil fauna and microbial communitiesDifferential O3sensitivity



### Affected ecosystem services

• Decreased productivity

• Decreased C sequestration

• Altered water cycling (Fig 9

- 7)

• Altered community composition (i.e., plant, insect & microbe)

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 4 June 2012 9.2.2 “Indoor,” Controlled Environment, and Greenhouse Chambers

The earliest experimental investigations of the effects of O 3 on plants utilized simple 

### 1 glass or plastic

- covered chambers, often located within greenhouses, into which a flow of 

### 2

O 3 - enriched air or oxygen could be passed to provide the exposure. The types, shapes, 

### 3 styles, materials of construction, and locations of t hese chambers have been numerous. 

### 4 Hogsett et al. (1987a ) have summarized the construction and performance of more 

### 5

elaborate and better instrumented chambers since the 196 0s, including those installed in 

### 6 greenhouses (with or without some control of temperature and light intensity). 

### 7

One greenhouse chamber approach that continues to yield useful information on the 

### 8 relationships of O 3 uptake to both physiological and growth ef fects employs continuous 

### 9 stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) first described by Heck et al. (1978 ) . Although originally 

### 10 developed to permit mass

- balance studies of O 3 flux to plants, their use has more recently 

### 11

widened to include short

- term physiological and growth studies of O 3 × CO 2 interactions 

### 12
( Loats and Rebbeck, 1999 ; Reinert et al., 1997 ; Rao et al., 1995 ; Reinert and Ho, 1995 ; 

### 13 Heagle et al., 1994a ) , and validation of visible foliar injury on a variety of plant species 

### 14
( Kline et al., 2009 ; Orendovici et al., 2003 ) . In many cases , supplementary lighting and 

### 15 temperature control of the surrounding structure have been used to control or modify the 

### 16

environmental conditions ( Heagle et al., 1994a )

. 

### 17

Many investigations have utilized commercially available controlled environment 

### 18

chambers and walk

- in rooms adapted to permit the introduction of a flow of O 3 into the 

### 19

controlled air

- volume. Such chambers continue to find use in genetic screening and in 

### 20 physiological and biochemical studies aimed primarily at improving the understanding of 

### 21 modes of action. For example, some of the studies of the O 3 responses of common 

### 22 plantain ( Plantago major ) populations have been conducted in controlled environment 

### 23

chambers ( Whitfield et a l., 1996 ; Reiling and Davison, 1994 )

. 

### 24

More recently, some researchers have been interested in attempting to investigate direct 

### 25

O 3 effects on reproductive process es, separate from the effects on vegetative processes 

### 26
( Black et al., 2010 ) . For this purpose, controlled exposure systems have been employed 

### 27 to expose the reproductive structures of annual plants to gaseous pollutants independe ntly 

### 28 of the vegetative component ( Black et al., 2010 ; Stewart et al., 1996 )

. 

### 29

9.2.3 Field Chambers

In general, field chamber studies are dominated by the use of various versions of the open 

### 30 top chamber (OTC) design, first described by Heagle et al. (1973 ) and Mandl et al. 

### 31
(1973 ) . The OTC met hod continues to be a widely used technique in the U.S. and Europe 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 5 June 2012 for exposing plants to varying levels of O 3 . Most of the new information confirms earlier 

### 1 conclusions and provides additional support for OTC use in assessing plant species and in 

### 2 developin g exposure

- response relationships. Chambers are generally ~3 meters in 

### 3

diameter with 2.5 meter

- high walls. Hogsett et al. (1987b ) described in detail many of the 

### 4 various modifications to the original OTC designs that appeared subsequently, e.g., the 

### 5 use of larger chambers for exposing s mall trees ( Kats et al., 1985 ) or grapevines ( Mandl 

### 6
et al., 198 9 ) , the addition of a conical baffle at the top to improve ventilation ( Kats et al., 

### 7

1976 ) , a frustum at the top to reduce ambient air incursions, and a plastic rain

- cap to 

### 8 exclude precipitation ( Hogsett et al., 1985 ) . All versions of OTCs included the discharge 

### 9 of air via ports in annular ducting or interiorly perforated d ouble

- layered walls at the base 

### 10 of the chambers to provide turbulent mixing and the upward mass flow of air. 

### 11

Chambered systems, including OTCs, have several advantages. For instance, they can 

### 12 provide a range of treatment levels including charcoal

- filtered (CF), clean

- air control, and 

### 13

several above ambient concentrations for O 3 experiments. Depending on experimental 

### 14 intent, a replicated, clean

- air control treatment is an essential component in many 

### 15 experimental designs. The OTC can provide a consistent, defi nable exposure because of 

### 16 the constant wind speed and delivery systems. Statistically robust concentration

- response 

### 17
(C

- R) functions can be developed using such systems for evaluating the implications of 

### 18 various alternative air quality scenarios on vegetati on response. Nonetheless, there are 

### 19 several characteristics of the OTC design and operation that can lead to exposures that 

### 20 might differ from those experienced by plants in the field. First, the OTC plants are 

### 21 subjected to constant air flow turbulence, whi ch, by lowering the boundary layer 

### 22 resistance to diffusion, may result in increased uptake. This may lead to an 

### 23

overestimation of effects relative to areas with less turbulence ( Krupa et al., 1995 ; Legge 

### 24
et al., 1995 ) . However, other research has found that OTC’s may slightly change vapor 

### 25 pressure deficit (VPD) in a way that may decrease the uptake of O 3 into leaves ( Piikki et 

### 26
al., 2008a ) . As with all methods that expose vegetation to modified O 3 concentrations in 

### 27

ch ambers, OTCs create internal environments that differ from ambient air. This so

- called 

### 28 “chamber effect” refers to the modification of microclimatic variables, including reduced 

### 29 and uneven light intensity, uneven rainfall, constant wind speed, reduced dew f ormation, 

### 30 and increased air temperatures ( Fuhrer, 1994 ; Manning and Krupa, 1992 ) . However, in at 

### 31 least one case where canopy resistance was quantified in OTCs and in the field, it was 

### 32

determin ed that gaseous pollutant exposure to crops in OTCs was similar to that which 

### 33

would have occurred at the same concentration in the field ( Unsworth et al., 1984a

, b )

. 

### 34

Because of the standardi zed methodology and protocols used in National Crop Loss 

### 35 Assessment Network (NCLAN) and other programs, the database can be assumed to be 

### 36 internally consistent. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 6 June 2012 While it is clear that OTCs can alter some aspects of the microenvironment and plant 

### 1 growth, it is important to establish whether or not these differences affect the relative 

### 2 response of a plant to O 3 . As noted in the 1996 O 3 AQCD, evidence from a number of 

### 3 comparative studies of OTCs and other exposure systems suggested that responses were 

### 4

essentia lly the same regardless of exposure system used and chamber effects did not 

### 5 significa ntly affect response. In studies that included exposure to ambient concentrations 

### 6

of O 3 in both OTCs, and open

- air, chamberless control plots, responses in the OTCs were 

### 7

t he same as in open

- air plots. Examples include studies of tolerant and sensitive white 

### 8
clover clones ( Trifolium repens ) to ambient O 3 in greenhouse, open top, and ambient 

### 9 plots ( Heagle et al., 1996 ) , Black Cherry ( Prunus serotina ) ( Neufeld et al., 1995 ) , and 

### 10 three species of conifers ( Neufeld et al., 2000 ) . Experimental comparisons between 

### 11 exposure methodologies are reviewed in Section 9.2.6

. 

### 12

Another type of field chamber called a “terracosm” has been developed and used in 

### 13

recent studies ( Lee et al., 2009a ) . Concern over the need to establish realistic plant

- litter



### 14 soil relationships as a prerequisite to studies of the effects of O 3 and CO 2 enrichment on 

### 15 ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa ) seedlings led Tingey et al. (1996 ) to develop closed, 

### 16 partially environmentally control led, sun

- lit chambers (“terracosms”) incorporating 

### 17 lysimeters (1 meter deep) containing forest soil in which the appropriate horizon structure 

### 18

was retained. 

### 19

Other researchers have recently published studies using another type of out

- door chamber 

### 20

called rec irculating Outdoor Plant Environment Chambers (OPECs) ( Flowers et al., 

### 21

2007 ) . These closed chambers are approximately 2.44 meters ×1.52 meters with a growth 

### 22 volume of approximately 3.7 m 3 in each chamber. T hese chambers admit 90% of full 

### 23 sunlight and control temperature, humidity and vapor pressure ( Fiscus et al., 1999 )

. 

### 24

9.2.4 Plume and FACE

- Type Systems

Plume systems are chamberless exposure facilities in which the atmosphere surrounding 

### 25 plants in the field is modified by the injection of pollutant gas into th e air above or 

### 26 around them from multiple orifices spaced to permit diffusion and turbulence, so as to 

### 27 establish relatively homogeneous conditions as the individual plumes disperse and mix 

### 28 with the ambient air. They can only be used to increase the O 3 level s in the ambient air. 

### 29

The most common plume system used in the U.S. is a modification of the free

- air carbon 

### 30 dioxide/ozone enrichment (FACE) system ( Hendrey et al., 1999 ; Hendrey and Kimball, 

### 31

1994 ) . Although originally designed to provide chamberless field facilities for studying 

### 32

the CO 2 effects of climate change, FACE systems have been adapted to include the 

### 33 dispensing of O 3 ( Karnosky et al., 1999 ) . This method has been employed in Illinois 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 7 June 2012 (SoyFACE) to study soybeans ( Morgan et al., 2004 ; Rogers et al., 2004 ) and in 

### 1 Wisconsin (Aspen FACE) to study trembling aspen ( Populus tremuloides ), birch ( Betula 

### 2
papyrifera ) and maple ( Acer saccharum ) ( Karnosky et al., 1999 )

. Volk et al. (2003 ) 

### 3 described a similar system for exposing grasslands that uses 7

- m diameter plots. Another 

### 4 similar FACE system has been used in Finland ( Saviranta et al., 2010 ; Oksanen, 2003 )

. 

### 5

The FACE systems in the U.S. discharge the pollutant gas (O 3 and/or CO 2 ) through 

### 6 orifices spaced along an annular ring (o r torus) or at different heights on a ring of vertical 

### 7 pipes. Computer

- controlled feedback from the monitoring of gas concentration regulates 

### 8 the feed rate of enriched air to the dispersion pipes. Feedback of wind speed and 

### 9

directional information ensures that the discharges only occur upwind of the treatment 

### 10 plots, and that discharge is restricted or closed down during periods of low wind speed or 

### 11 calm conditions. The diameter of the arrays and their height (25

- 30 m) in some FACE 

### 12 systems requires large thr oughputs of enriched air per plot, particularly in forest tree 

### 13 systems. The cost of the throughputs tends to limit the number of enrichment treatments, 

### 14 although Hendrey et al. (1999 ) argued that the cost on an enriched volume basis is 

### 15 comparable to that of chamber systems. 

### 16

A different FACE

- type facility has been developed for the Kranzberg Ozone Fumigation 

### 17 Experiment (KROFEX) in Germany beginning in 2000 ( Nunn et al., 2002 ; Werner and 

### 18
Fabian, 2002 ) . The experiment aims to study the effects of O 3 on mature stands of beech 

### 19
( Fagus sylvatica ) and spruce ( Picea abies ) trees in a system that functions independently 

### 20 of wind direction. The enrichment of a large volume of the ambient air immediately 

### 21 above the canopy takes place via orifices in vertical tubes suspended from a horizontal 

### 22 grid supported above the canopy. 

### 23

Although plume systems make virtually none of the modifications to the physical 

### 24

environment that are inevitable with chambers, their successful use depends on selecting 

### 25 the appropriate numbers, sizes, and orientations of the discharge orifices to avoid 

### 26

“hot

- spots” resulting from the direct impingement of jets of pollutant

- enriched air on 

### 27 plant foliage ( Werner and Fabian, 2002 ) . Because mixing is unassisted and completely 

### 28 dependent on wind turbulence and diffusion, local gradients are inevitable especially in 

### 29 large

- scale systems. FACE systems have provisions for shutting down under low wind 

### 30 speed or calm conditions and for an experimental area that is usually defined within a 

### 31 generous border in order to strive for homogeneity of the exposure concentrations within 

### 32 the treatment area. They are also dependent upon c ontinuous computer

- controlled 

### 33

feedback of the O 3 concentrations in the mixed treated air and of the meteorological 

### 34 conditions. Plume and FACE systems also are unable to reduce O 3 levels below ambient 

### 35

in areas where O 3 concentrations are phytotoxic. 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 8 June 2012 9.2.5 Ambient Gradients

Ambient O 3 gradients that occur in the U.S. hold potential for the examination of plant 

### 1 responses over multiple levels of exposure. However, few such gradients can be found 

### 2 that meet the rigorous statistical requirements for comparable site char acteristics such as 

### 3 soil type, temperature, rainfall, radiation, and aspect ( Manning and Krupa, 1992 ) ; 

### 4 although with small plants, soil variability can be avoided by the use of plants in large 

### 5 pots. The use of soil monoliths transported to various locations along natural O 3 gradien ts 

### 6 is another possible approach to overcome differences in soils; however, this approach is 

### 7 also limited to small plants. 

### 8

Studies in the 1970s used the natural gradients occurring in southern California to assess 

### 9 yield losses of alfalfa and tomato ( Oshima et al., 1977 ; Oshima et al., 1976 ) . A transect 

### 10 study of the impact of O 3 on the growth of white clover and barley in the U.K. was 

### 11 confounded by differences in the concurrent gradients of SO 2 and NO 2 pollution 

### 12
( Ashmore et al., 1988 ) . Studies of forest tree species in national parks in the eastern U.S. 

### 13
( Winner et al., 1989 ) revealed increasing gradients of O 3 and visible foliar injury with 

### 14

increased elevation. 

### 15

Several studies have used the San Bernardino Mounta ins Gradient Study in southern 

### 16 California to study the effects of O 3 and N deposition on forests dominated by ponderosa 

### 17 and Jeffrey pine ( Jones and Paine, 2006 ; Arbaugh et al., 2003 ; Grulke, 1999 ; U.S. EPA, 

### 18

1977 ) . However, it is difficult to separate the effects of N and O 3 in some ins tances in 

### 19

these studies ( Arbaugh et al., 2003 ) . An O 3 gradient in Wisconsin has been used to study 

### 20 foliar injury in a series of trembling aspen clones ( Populus tremuloides ) differing in O 3 

### 21 sensitivity ( Maňkovská et al., 2005 ; Karnosky et al., 1999 ) . Also in the Midwest, an 

### 22

east

- west O 3 gradient around southern Lake Michigan was used to look at growth and 

### 23 visible foliar injury in ( P. serotina ) and common milkweed ( Asclepias syriaca ) ( Bennett 

### 24
et al., 2006 )

. 

### 25

More recently, studies have been published that have used natural gradients to study a 

### 26 variety of endpoints and s pecies. For example, Gregg et al. (2003 ) studied cottonwood 

### 27
( Populus deltoides ) saplings grown in an urban to rural gradient of O 3 by using seven 

### 28

locations in the New York City area. The secondary nature of the reactions of O 3 

### 29

formation an d NO X titration reactions within the city center resulted in significa ntly 

### 30 higher cumulative O 3 exposures in more rural sites. Potential modifying factors such as 

### 31 soil composition, moisture, or temperature were either controlled or accounted for in 

### 32 analysi s. As shown in Section 9.6.3.3 , the response of this species to O 3 exposure was 

### 33 much stronger than most species. The natural gradient exposures were reproduced in 

### 34 parallel using OTCs, and yielded similar results. Also, the U.S. Forest Service Forest 

### 35 Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program uses large

- scale O 3 exposure patter ns across the 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 9 June 2012 continental U.S. to study occurrences of foliar injury due to O 3 exposure ( Smith et al., 

### 1

2003 ) (Section 9.4.2 ). Finally, McLaughlin et al. (2007a ); 2007b ) used spatial and 

### 2 temporal O 3 gradients to study for est growth and water use in the southern Appalachians. 

### 3 These studies found varying O 3 exposures between years and between sites. 

### 4

9.2.6 Comparative Studies

All experimental approaches used to expose plants to O 3 have strengths and weaknesses. 

### 5 One potential weakness of laboratory, greenhouse, or field chamber studies is the 

### 6 potential effect of the chamber on micrometeorology. In contrast, plume, FACE and 

### 7 gradient systems are limited by the very small number of pos sible exposure levels 

### 8 (almost always no more than two), small replication and the inability to reduce O 3 levels 

### 9 below ambient. In general, experiments that aim at characterizing the effect of a single 

### 10 variable, e.g., exposure to O 3 , must not only manipulat e the levels of that variable, but 

### 11 also control potentially interacting variables and confounders, or else account for them. 

### 12 However, while increasing control of environmental variables makes it easier to discern 

### 13
the effect of the variable of interest, it must be balanced with the ability to extend 

### 14
conclusions to natural, non

- experimental settings. More naturalistic exposure systems, on 

### 15 the other hand, let interacting factors vary freely, resulting in greater unexplainable 

### 16 variability. The various exposure methodologies used with O 3 vary in the balance each 

### 17 strikes between control of environmental inputs, closeness to the natural environment, 

### 18 noisiness of the response data, and ability to make general inferences. 

### 19

Studies have examined the comparability of r esults obtained though the various exposure 

### 20 methodologies. As noted in the 1996 O 3 AQCD, evidence from the comparative studies 

### 21

of OTCs and from closed chamber and O 3 - exclusion exposure systems on the growth of 

### 22
alfalfa ( Medicago sativa ) by Olszyk et al. (1986 ) suggested that, since significa nt 

### 23 differences were found for fewer than 10% of the growth parameters measured, the 

### 24 responses were, in general, essentially the same regardless of ex posure system used, and 

### 25

chamber effects did not significa ntly affect response. In 1988, Heagle et al. (1988 ) 

### 26 concluded: “Although chamber effects on yield are common, there are no results showing 

### 27 that this will result in a changed yield response to O 3 .” A study of the effects of an 

### 28

enclosure exami ned the responses of tolerant and sensitive white clover clones ( Trifolium 

### 29

repens ) to ambient O 3 in a greenhouse, open

- top chamber, and ambient (no chamber) 

### 30 plots ( Heagle et al., 1996 ) . For individual harvests, greenhouse O 3 exposure reduced the 

### 31 forage weight of the sensitive clone 7 to 23% more than in OTCs. However, the response 

### 32

in OTCs was the same as in a mbient plots. Several studies have shown very similar 

### 33 response of yield to O 3 for plants grown in pots or in the ground, suggesting that even 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 10 June 2012 such a significa nt change in environment does not alter the proportional response to O 3 , 

### 1 providing that the plants are well watered ( Heagle et al., 1983 ; Heagle, 1979 )

. 

### 2

A few recent studies have compared results of O 3 experiments between OTCs, FACE 

### 3 experiments, and gradient studies. For example, a series of studies undertaken at Aspen 

### 4

FACE ( Isebrands et al., 2001 ; Isebrands et al., 2000 ) showed that O 3 symptom expression 

### 5 was generally similar in OTCs, FACE, and ambient O 3 gradient sites, and supported t he 

### 6 previously observed variation among trembling aspen clones using OTCs ( Maňkovská et 

### 7
al., 2005 ; Karnosky et al., 1999 ) . In the SoyFACE experiment in Illinois, soybean 

### 8 (Pioneer 93B15 cultivar) yield loss data from a two

- year study was publis hed ( Morgan et 

### 9
al., 2006 ) . This cultivar is a recent selection and, like most modern cultivars, has been 

### 10 selected under an already high current O 3 exposure. It was found to have average 

### 11 sensitivity to O 3 compared to 22 other cultivars tested at SoyFACE. In this experiment, 

### 12 ambient hourly O 3 concentrations were increased by approximately 20% and measured 

### 13 yields were decreased by 15% in 2002 as a result of the increased O 3 exposure ( Morgan 

### 14
et al., 2006 ) . To compare these results to chamber studies, Morgan et al. (2006 ) 

### 15 calculated the expected yield loss from a linear relationship constructed fro m chamber 

### 16 data using seven

- hour seasonal averages ( Ashmore, 2002 ) . They calculated an 8% 

### 17 expected yield loss from the 2002 O 3 exposure using that linear relationship. As reported 

### 18

in Section 9.2.5

, Gregg et al. (2006

, 2003 ) f ound similar O 3 effects on cottonwood 

### 19 sapling biomass growth along an ambient O 3 gradient in the New York City area and a 

### 20 parallel OTC study. 

### 21

Finally, EPA conducted comparisons of exposure

- response model predictions based on 

### 22
OTC studies, and more recent FA CE observations. These comparisons include yield of 

### 23 annual crops, and biomass growth of trees. They are presented in Section 9.6.3 of this 

### 24

document. 

### 25



## 9.3 Mechanisms Governing Vegetation Response to Ozone

9.3.1 Introduction

This section focuses on the effects of O 3 stress on plants and their responses to that stress 

### 26 on the molecular, biochemical and physiological levels. First, the pathway of O 3 uptake 

### 27

into the l eaf and the initial chemical reactions occurring in the substomatal cavity and 

### 28 apoplast will be described (Section 9.3.2 ); additionally, direct effe cts of O 3 on the 

### 29 stomatal apparatus will be discussed. Once O 3 has entered the substomatal cavity and 

### 30 apoplast, it is thought that the cell must be able to detect the presence of O 3 or its 

### 31

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 11 June 2012 breakdown products in order to initiate the rapid changes in signal ing pathways and gene 

### 1 expression that have been measured in O 3 - treated plants. While it remains unclear exactly 

### 2

how O 3 and/or its breakdown products are detected in the apoplast and how that leads to 

### 3 signaling of oxidative stress in plants, much progress h as been made in examining several 

### 4 different mechanisms that may contribute to detecting the presence of O 3 and its 

### 5 breakdown products, and also initiating a signal transduction cascade, which will be 

### 6

described in Section 9.3.3.1 . The next section focuses on changes in gene and protein 

### 7 expression measured in plants exposed to O 3 , with particular emphasis on results from 

### 8 transcriptome (all RNA molecules produced in a cell) and proteome (all proteins 

### 9 produced in a cell) analyses (Section 9.3.3.2 ). Subsequently, the role of phytohormones 

### 10 such as salicylic acid (SA), ethylene (ET), jasmonic acid (JA), and abscisic acid (ABA) 

### 11 and their interactions in both signal transduction processes and in determining plant 

### 12
response to O 3 is discussed in Section 9.3.3.3 . After O 3 uptake, some plants can respond 

### 13

to the oxidative stress with deto xification to minimize damage. These mechanisms of 

### 14 detoxification, with particular emphasis on antioxidant enzymes and metabolites, are 

### 15

reviewed in Section 9.3.4 . The next section focuses on changes in primary and secondary 

### 16 metabolism in plants exposed to O 3 , looking at photosynthesis, respiration and several 

### 17 secondary metabolites, some of which may also act as antioxidants and protect the plant 

### 18

from oxidative stress (Section 9.3.5 ). For many of these topics, information from the 

### 19

2006 O 3 AQCD has been summarized, as this information is still val id and supported by 

### 20 more recent findings. For other topics, such as genomics and proteomics, which have 

### 21 arisen due to the availability of new technologies, the information is based solely on new 

### 22 publications with no reference to the 2006 O 3 AQCD. 

### 23

As Sectio n 9.3 focuses on mechanisms underlying effects of O 3 on plants and their 

### 24 response to it, the conditions that are used to study these mechanisms do not always 

### 25 reflect conditions that a plant may be exposed to in an agricultural setting or natural 

### 26 ecosystem. The goal of many of these studies is to generate an O 3 effect in a relatively 

### 27 short period of time and not always to simulate ambient O 3 exposures . Therefore, plants 

### 28 are often exposed to unrealistically high O 3 concentrations for several hours or days 

### 29 (acute exposure), and only in some cases to ambient or slightly elevated O 3 

### 30 concentrations for longer time periods (chronic exposure). Additionally, t he plant species 

### 31 utilized in these studies are often not agriculturally important or commonly found as part 

### 32 of natural ecosystems. Model organisms such as Arabidopsis thaliana are used frequently 

### 33 as they are easy to work with, and mutants or transgenic pla nts are easy to develop or 

### 34 have already been developed. Furthermore, the Arabidopsis genome has been sequenced, 

### 35 and much is known about the molecular basis of many biochemical and cellular 

### 36

processes. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 12 June 2012 Many of the studies described in this section focus on changes in the expression of genes 

### 1

in O 3 - treated plants. Changes in gene expression (i.e., either upregulation or 

### 2 downregulation of gene expression) do not always translate into changes in protein 

### 3 quantity and/or activity, as there are many levels of post

- transcriptional and post



### 4 translational modifications which impact protein quantity and activity. Many studies do 

### 5 not evaluate whether the observed changes in gene expression lead to changes at the 

### 6 protein level and, therefore, it is not always clear if the changes in gene expression 

### 7 represent a meaningful biological response to O 3 exposure. However, with the advent of 

### 8 proteomics, some very recent studies have evaluated changes in protein expression for 

### 9 large numbers of proteins in O 3 treated plants, and the findings from these studies support 

### 10 the previous results regarding changes in gene expression studies as a result of O 3 

### 11 exposure. The next step in the process is to determine the implications of the measured 

### 12 changes occurring at the cellular level to whole plants and ecosystems, which is an 

### 13 important topic of study which has not been widely addressed. 

### 14

The most noteworthy n ew body of research since the 2006 O 3 AQCD is on the 

### 15 understanding of molecular mechanisms underlying how plants are affected by O 3 ; many 

### 16

of the recent studies reviewed here focus on changes in gene expression in plants exposed 

### 17

to elevated O 3 . The findings summarized in the 2006 O 3 AQCD included decreases in 

### 18 transcript levels of photosynthesis associated genes, and increases in transcript levels of 

### 19 genes encoding for pathogenesis

- related proteins, enzymes needed for ethylene synthesis, 

### 20 antioxidant enzymes a nd defense genes such as phenylalanine ammonia lyase in plants 

### 21 exposed to O 3 . These findings have been supported by the new studies, and the advent of 

### 22 new technologies has allowed for a more comprehensive understanding of the 

### 23 mechanisms governing how plant s are affected by O 3
. 

### 24

In summary, these new studies have increased knowledge of the molecular, biochemical 

### 25 and cellular mechanisms occurring in plants in response to O 3 by often using artificial 

### 26 exposure conditions and model organisms. This information ad ds to the understanding of 

### 27 the basic biology of how plants are affected by oxidative stress in the absence of any 

### 28 other potential stressors. The results of these studies provide important insights, even 

### 29 though they may not always directly translate into ef fects observed in other plants under 

### 30 more realistic exposure conditions. 

### 31

9.3.2 Ozone Uptake into the Leaf

Appendix AX9.2.3 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD clearly described the process by which O 3 

### 32 enters plant leaves through open stomata ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . This information continues 

### 33 to be valid and is only summarized here. 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 13 June 2012 Stomata p rovide the principal pathway for O 3 to enter and affect plants ( Massman and 

### 1
Grantz, 1995 ; Fuentes et al., 1992 ; Reich, 1987 ; Leuning et al., 1979 ) . Ozone moves into 

### 2 the leaf interior by diffusing through open stomata, and environmental conditions which 

### 3 promote high rates of gas exchange will favor the uptake of the pollutant by the leaf. 

### 4 Factors that may limit uptake include boundary layer resistance and the size of the 

### 5 stomatal aperture ( Figure 9

- 2 ) ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Once inside the substomatal cavity, O 3 

### 6 is thought to rapidly react with the aqueous apoplast to form breakdown products known 

### 7
as reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ), superoxide (O 2 

### ־ (, 

### 8
hydroxyl radicals (HO · ) and peroxy radicals (HO 2 · ) ( Figure 9

- 3 ). Hydrogen peroxide is 

### 9 not only a toxic breakdown product of O 3 , bu t has been shown to function as a signaling 

### 10 molecule, which is activated in response to both biotic and abiotic stressors. The role of 

### 11

H 2 O 2 in signaling was described in detail in the 2006 O 3 AQCD. Additional organic 

### 12 molecules present in the apoplast or ce ll wall, such as those containing double bonds or 

### 13 sulfhydryls that are sensitive to oxidation, could also be converted to oxygenated 

### 14 molecules after interacting with O 3 ( Figure 9

- 4 ). These reactions are not only pH 

### 15 dependent, but are also influenced by the presence of other molecules in the apoplast 

### 16
( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . The 2006 O 3 AQCD provided a comprehensive summary of these 

### 17 possible interactions of O 3 with other biomolecules ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . It is in the 

### 18 apoplast that initial detoxificat ion reactions by antioxidant metabolites and enzymes take 

### 19 place, and these initial reactions are critical to reduce concentrations of the oxidative 

### 20 breakdown products of O 3 ; these reactions are described in more detail in Section 9.3.4 of 

### 21

this document. 

### 22

9.3.2.1 Changes in Stomatal Function

Ozone

- induced changes in stomatal conductance have been reviewed in detail in previous 

### 23

O 3 AQCDs. The findings summarize d in these documents demonstrate that stomatal 

### 24 conductance is often reduced in plants exposed to O 3 , resulting either from a direct 

### 25 impact of O 3 on the stomatal complex which causes closure, or as a response to 

### 26 increasing CO 2 concentrations in the substoma tal cavity as carbon fixation is reduced. 

### 27 Although the nature of these effects depends upon many different factors, including the 

### 28 plant species, concentration and duration of the O 3 exposure, and prevailing 

### 29 meteorological conditions, stomatal conductance i s often negatively affected by plant 

### 30
exposure to O 3 ( Wittig et al., 2007 ) . Decreases in conductance have been shown to result 

### 31

from direct as well as indirect effects on stomata ( Witti g et al., 2007 ) . Results from the 

### 32 use of Arabidopsis mutants and new technologies, which allow for analysis of guard cell 

### 33 function in whole plants rather than in isolated guard cells or epidermal peels, suggest 

### 34

that O 3 may also have a direct impact on stomatal guard cells, leading to alterations in 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 14 June 2012 stomatal conductance. The use of a new simultaneous O 3 exposure/gas exchange device 

### 1 has demonstrated that exposure of Arabidopsis ecotypes Col

- 0 and Ler to 150 ppb O 3 

### 2

resulte d in a 60

- 70% decline in stomatal conductance within 9

- 12 minutes of beginning 

### 3 the exposure. Twenty to thirty minutes later, stomatal conductance had returned to its 

### 4 initial value, even with continuing exposure to O 3 , indicating a rapid direct effect of O 3 

### 5

on stomatal function ( Kollist et al., 2007 ) . This transient decrease in stomatal 

### 6 conductance was not observed in the abscisic acid insensitive (ABI2) Arabidopsis 

### 7 mutant. As the ABI2 protei n is thought to regulate the signal transduction process 

### 8 involved in stomatal response downstream of ROS production, the authors suggest that 

### 9

the transient decrease in stomatal conductance in the Col

- 0 and Ler ecotypes results from 

### 10 the biological action of ROS in transducing signals, rather than direct physical damage to 

### 11 guard cells by ROS ( Kollist et al., 2007 ) . This rapid transient decrease in stomatal 

### 12

conductance was also not observed whe n exposing the Arabidopsis mutant slac1 (slow 

### 13

anion channel

- associated 1) to 200 ppb O 3 ( Vahisalu et al., 2008 ) . The SLAC1 protein 

### 14 was shown to be essential for guard cell slow anion channel functioning and for stomatal 

### 15 closure in response to O 3 . Based on additional studies using a variety of Arabidopsis 

### 16 mutants impaired in various aspects of stomatal function, Vahisalu et al. (2008 ) suggest 

### 17 that the presence of ROS in the guard cell apoplast (formed either by O 3 breakdown or 

### 18 through ROS production from NADPH oxidase activity) leads to the activation of a 

### 19 signaling pathway in the guard cells, which includes SLAC1, and results in stomatal 

### 20

closure. 

### 21

A review by McAinsh et al. (2002 ) discusses the role of calcium as a part of the signal 

### 22 transduction pathway invo lved in regulating stomatal responses to pollutant stress. A 

### 23 number of studies in this review provide some evidence that exposure to O 3 increases the 

### 24 cytosolic free calcium concentration ([Ca 2+ ]cyt) in guard cells, which may result in an 

### 25

inhibition of the plasma membrane inward

- rectifying K + channels in guard cells, which 

### 26

allow for the K + uptake needed for stomatal opening ( McAinsh et al., 2002 ; Torsethaugen 

### 27
et al., 1999 ) . This would compromise the ability of the stomata to respond to various 

### 28 stimuli, including light, CO 2 concentration and drought. Pei et al. (2000 ) reported that the 

### 29 presence of H 2 O 2 activated Ca 2+

- permeable channels, wh ich mediate increases in 

### 30
[Ca 2+ ]cyt in guard cell plasma membranes of Arabidopsis. They also determined that 

### 31
abscisic acid (ABA) induced H 2 O 2 production in guard cells, leading to ABA

- induced 

### 32

stomatal closure via activation of the membrane Ca 2+ channels. Th erefore, it is possible 

### 33

that H 2 O 2 , a byproduct of O 3 breakdown in the apoplast, could disrupt the Ca 2+

- ABA 

### 34 signaling pathway that is involved in regulating stomatal responses ( McAinsh et al., 

### 35

2002 ) . The studies described here provide some evidence to suggest that O 3 and its 

### 36 breakdown products can directly affect stomatal functioning by impacting the sign al 

### 37 transduction pathways which regulate guard cells. Stomatal sluggishness has been 

### 38 described as a delay in stomatal response to changing environmental conditions in 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 15 June 2012 sensitive species exposed to higher concentrations and/or longer

- term O 3 exposures 

### 1
( Paoletti and Grulke, 2010

, 2005 ; McAinsh et al., 2002 ) . It is possible that the signaling 

### 2 pathways described above could be involved in mediating this stomatal sluggishn ess in 

### 3 some plant species under certain O 3 exposure conditions ( Paoletti and Grulke, 2005 ; 

### 4
McAinsh et al., 2002 )

. 

### 5

Note: While details among species vary, the general overview remains the same. Light that drives photosynthesis generally falls upon the upper (adaxial) leaf surface. Carbon dioxide and ozone enter through the stomata on the lower (abaxial) leaf surface , while water vapor exits through the stomata (transpiration).



### Figure 9

- 2 The microarchitecture of a dicot leaf.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 16 June 2012 Note: (a) Ozone reacts at the double bonds to form carbonyl groups. (b) Under certain circumstances, peroxides are generated.



### Figure 9

- 3 Possible reactions of ozone within water.

Note: (a) The typical Crigee mechanism is shown in which several reaction paths from the initial product are shown. (b) Typical reaction of ascorbic acid with ozone. Source: Adapt ed from Mudd (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 4 The Crigee mech anism of ozone attack of a double bond.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 17 June 2012 9.3.3 Cellular to Systemic Responses

9.3.3.1 Ozone Detection and Signal Transduction

New technologies allowing for large

- scale analysis of oxidative stress

- induced changes in 

### 1 gene expression have facilitated the study of signal tr ansduction processes associated 

### 2 with the perception and integration of responses to the stress. Many of these studies have 

### 3 been conducted using Arabidopsis or tobacco plants, for which a variety of mutants are 

### 4 available and/or which can be easily genetical ly modified to generate either loss

- of



### 5

function or over

- expressing genotypes. Several comprehensive review articles provide an 

### 6

overview of what is known of O 3 - induced signal transduction processes and how they 

### 7 may help to explain differential sensitivity o f plants to the pollutant ( Ludwikow and 

### 8
Sadowski, 2008 ; Baier et al., 2005 ; Kangasjarvi et al., 2005 ) . Ad ditionally, analysis of 

### 9 several studies of transcriptome changes has also allowed for the compilation of these 

### 10

data to determine an initial time

- course for O 3 - induced activation of various signaling 

### 11 compounds ( Kangasjarvi et al., 2005 )

. 

### 12

A number of different mechanisms for detection of O 3 by plants have been proposed; 

### 13 however, there is still much that is not known about this process. Some of the earliest 

### 14 events that occur in plants exposed to O 3 have been described in the guard cells of 

### 15 stomata. Reactive oxygen species were observed in the chloroplasts of gua rd cells in the 

### 16

O 3 tolerant Col

- 0 Arabidopsis thaliana ecotype plants within 5 minutes of plant exposure 

### 17

to 350 ppb O 3 ( Joo et al., 2005 ) . Reactive oxygen species from the breakdown of O 3 in 

### 18 the apoplast are believed to activate GTPases (G

- proteins), which, in turn, activate 

### 19 several intracellular sources of ROS, including ROS derived from the chloropla sts. 

### 20

G

- proteins are also believed to play a role in activating membrane

- bound NADPH 

### 21 oxidases to produce ROS and, as a result, propagate the oxidative burst to neighboring 

### 22

cells ( Joo et al., 2005 ) . Therefore, G

- proteins are recognized as important molecules 

### 23 involved in plant responses to O 3 and may play a role in detecting the presence of ROS 

### 24

from the breakdown of O 3 in the apoplast ( Kangasjarvi et al., 2005 ; Booker et al., 2004a )

. 

### 25

A change in the redox state of the plant and the oxidation of sensitive molecules in itself 

### 26 may represent a means of perception and signaling of oxidative stress in plants. 

### 27

Disulfide

- thiol conversions in proteins and the redox state of the glutathione pool may be 

### 28 important components of redox detection and signal transduction ( Foyer and Noctor, 

### 29

2005a

, b )

. 

### 30

Calcium (Ca 2+ ) has also been implicated in the transdu ction of signals to the nucleus in 

### 31 response to oxidative stress. The influx of Ca 2+ from the apoplast into the cell occurs 

### 32 early during plant exposure to O 3 , and it is thought to play a role in regulating the activity 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 18 June 2012 of protein kinases, which are discusse d below ( Baier et al., 2005 ; Hamel et al., 2005 )

. 

### 1

Calcium channel blockers inhibited O 3 - induced activation of protein kinases in tobacco 

### 2 suspension cells exposed to 500 ppb O 3 for 10 minutes, indicating that the opening of 

### 3

Ca 2+ channels is an important upstream signaling event or that the ( as yet unknown ) 

### 4 upstream process has a requirement for Ca 2+ ( Samuel et al., 2000 )

. 

### 5

Further transmission of information regarding the presence of ROS to the nucleus 

### 6 involves mitogen

- activated protein kinases (MAPK), which phosphorylate proteins and 

### 7

activate various cellular res ponses ( Hamel et al., 2005 ) . Mitogen

- activated protein 

### 8

kinases a re induced in several different plant species in response to O 3 exposure, 

### 9 including tobacco ( Samuel et al., 2005 ) , Arabidopsis ( Ludwikow et al., 2004 ) , the shrub 

### 10
Phillyrea latifolia ( Paolacci et al., 2007 ) and poplar ( Hamel et al., 2005 ) . Disruption of 

### 11 these signal transduction pathways by over

- expressing or suppressing MAPK activity in 

### 12 different Arabidopsis and tobacco lines resulted in increased plant sensitivity to O 3 ( Miles 

### 13
et al., 2005 ; Samuel and Ellis, 2002 ) . Additionally, greater O 3 tolerance of several 

### 14 Arabidopsis ecotypes was correlated wit h greater upregulat ion of MAPK signaling 

### 15 pathways upon O 3 exposure than in more sensitive Arabidopsis ecotypes ( Li et al., 

### 16

2006b ; Mahalingam et al., 2006 ; Overmyer et al., 2005 ) , indicating that determination of 

### 17 plant sensitivity and plant response to O 3 may, in part, be determined not only by whether 

### 18

th ese pathways are turned on, but also by the magnitude of the signals moving through 

### 19

these communication channels. 

### 20

In conclusion, experimental evidence suggests that there are likely several different 

### 21 mechanisms by which the plant detects the presence of O 3 or its breakdown products. 

### 22 These mechanisms may vary by species or developmental stage of the plant, or may 

### 23

co

- exist and be activated by different exposure conditions. Calcium and protein kinases 

### 24 are likely involved in relaying information about the prese nce of the stressor to the 

### 25 nucleus and other cellular compartments as a first step in determining whether and how 

### 26 the plant will respond to the stress. 

### 27

9.3.3.2 Gene and Protein Expression Changes in Response to Ozone

The advent of DNA microarray technology has al lowed for the study of gene expression 

### 28 in cells on a large scale. Rather than assessing changes in gene expression of individual 

### 29 genes, DNA microarrays facilitate the evaluation of entire transcriptomes, providing a 

### 30 comprehensive picture of simultaneous al terations in gene expression. In addition, these 

### 31 studies have provided more insight into the complex interactions between molecules, how 

### 32
those interactions lead to the communication of information in the cell (or between 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 19 June 2012 neighboring cells) , and which role these interactions play in determining tolerance or 

### 1 sensitivity and how a plant may respond to stresses such as O 3 ( Ludwi kow and Sadowski, 

### 2

2008 ) . Transcriptome analysis of O 3 - treated plants has been performed in several species, 

### 3 including Arabidopsis thaliana ( Li et al., 2006b ; Tosti et al., 2006 ; Heidenreich et al., 

### 4

2005 ; Mahalingam et al., 2005 ; Tamaoki et al., 2003 ) , pepper ( Cap sicum annuum) ( Lee 

### 5
and Yun, 2006 ) , clover ( Medicago truncatula ) ( Puckette et al., 2008 )

, Phillyrea latifolia 

### 6
( Paolacci et al., 2007 ) , poplar ( Street et al., 2011 ) , and European beech ( Fagus sylvatica ) 

### 7
( Olbrich et al., 2010 ; Olbrich et al., 2009 ; Olbrich et al., 2005 ) . In some cases, 

### 8 researchers compared transcriptomes of two or more cultivars, ecotypes or mutants that 

### 9 differed in their sensitivity to O 3 ( Puckette et al., 2008 ; Rizzo et al., 2007 ; Lee and Yun, 

### 10

2006 ; Li et al., 2006b ; Tamaoki et al., 2003 ) . Species, O 3 exposure conditions 

### 11 (concentration, duration of exposure) and sampling times varied considerably in these 

### 12

studies. However, functional classification of the genes that were either upregulated or 

### 13 downregulated by plant exposure to O 3 exhibited common trends. Genes involved in 

### 14 plant defense, signaling and those associated with the synthesis of plant hormones and 

### 15

seconda ry metabolism were generallyupregulated, while those related to photosynthesis 

### 16 and general metabolism were typically downregulated in O 3 - treated plants ( Puckette et 

### 17
al., 2008 ; Lee and Yun, 2006 ; Li et al., 2006b ; Tosti et al., 2006 ; Olbrich et al., 2005 ; 

### 18
Tamaoki et al., 2003 )

. 

### 19

Analysis of the transcriptome has been used to evaluate differences in gene expression 

### 20 between sensitive and tolerant plants in response to O 3 exposure. In pepper, 67% of the 

### 21 180 genes studied that were affected by O 3 were differentially regulated in the sensitive 

### 22

and tolerant cultivars. At both 0 hours and 48 hours after a 3

- day exposure at 150 ppb, O 3 

### 23 responsive genes were either upregulated or downregulated more markedly in the 

### 24

sensitive than in the tolerant cu ltivar ( Lee and Yun, 2006 ) . Transcriptome analysis also 

### 25 revealed differences in timing and magnitude of changes in gene expres sion between 

### 26 sensitive and tolerant clovers. Acute exposure (300 ppb O 3 for 6 hours) led to the 

### 27 production of an oxidative burst in both clovers ( Puckette et al., 2008 ) . However, the 

### 28

se nsitive

- Jemalong cultivar exhibited a sustained ROS burst and a concomitant 

### 29 downregulat ion of defense response genes at 12 hours after the onset of exposure, while 

### 30 the tolerant JE 154 accession showed much more rapid and large

- scale transcriptome 

### 31 changes t han the Jemalong cultivar ( Puckette et al., 2008 )

. 

### 32

Arabidopsis ecotypes WS and Col

- 0 were exposed to 1.2 × ambient O 3 concentrations for 

### 33

8

- 12 days at the SoyFACE site ( Li et al., 2006b ) . The sensitive WS ecotype showed a far 

### 34 greater number of changes in gene expression in response to this low

- level O 3 exposure 

### 35

than the tolerant Col

- 0 ecotype. In a different study, exposure of the WS ecotype to 

### 36

300 ppb O 3 for 6 hours showed a rapid induction of genes leading to cell death, such as 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 20 June 2012 proteases, and downregulation or inactivation of cell signaling genes, demonstrating an 

### 1 ineffective defense response in this O 3 sensitive ecotype ( Mahalingam et al., 2006 )

. 

### 2

The temporal response of plants to O 3 exposure was evaluated in the Arabidopsis Col

- 0 

### 3 ecotype during a 6

- hour exposure at 350 ppb O 3 and for 6 hours after the exposure was 

### 4 completed. Results of this study, shown in Figure 9

- 5 , indicate that genes associated with 

### 5 signal transduction and regulation of transcription were in the class of early upregulated 

### 6 genes, while genes associated with redox homeostasi s and defense/stress response were 

### 7 in the class of late upregulated genes ( Mahalingam et al., 2005 )

. 

### 8

A few studies have b een conducted to evaluate transcriptome changes in response to 

### 9 longer term chronic O 3 exposures in woody plant species. Longer term exposures resulted 

### 10 in the upregulation of genes associated with secondary metabolites, including 

### 11 isoprenoids, polyamines and phenylpropanoids in 2

- year

- old seedlings of the 

### 12

Mediterranean shrub Phillyrea latifolia exposed to 110 ppb O 3 for 90 days ( Paolacci et 

### 13
al., 2007 ) . In 3

- year

- old European beech saplings exposed to O 3 for 20 months (with 

### 14 monthly average twice ambient O 3 concentrations ranging from 11 to 8 0 ppb), 

### 15

O 3 - induced changes in gene transcription were similar to those observed for herbaceous 

### 16 species ( Olbrich et al., 2009 ) . Genes encoding proteins associated with plant stress 

### 17 response, including ethylene biosynthesis, pathogenesis

- related proteins and enzymes 

### 18 detoxifying ROS, wereupregulated. Some genes associated with prim ary metabolism, cell 

### 19 structure, cell division and cell growth were reduced ( Olbrich et al., 2009 ) . In a similar 

### 20 study using adult European beech trees, it was determined that the magnitude of the 

### 21 transcriptional changes described above was far greater in the saplings than in the adult 

### 22 trees exposed to the same O 3 concentrations for the same time period ( Olbrich et al., 

### 23

2010 )

. 

### 24

The results from transcriptome studies described above have been substantiated by results 

### 25 from proteome analysis in rice, poplar, European be ech, wheat, and soybean. Exposure of 

### 26 soybean to 120 ppb O 3 for 12 h/day for 3 days in growth chambers resulted in decreases 

### 27 in the quantity of proteins associated with photosynthesis, while proteins involved with 

### 28

antioxidant defense and carbon metabolism i ncreased ( Ahsan et al., 2010 ) . Young poplar 

### 29 plants exposed t o 120 ppb O 3 in a growth chamber for 35 days also showed significa nt 

### 30 changes in proteins involved in carbon metabolism ( Bohler et al., 2007 ) . Declines in 

### 31 enzymes associated with carbon fixation, the Calvin cycle and photosystem II were 

### 32 measured, while ascorbate peroxidase and enzymes associated with glucose catabolism 

### 33 increased in abundance. In another study to determine the impacts of O 3 on both 

### 34 developing and fully expanded poplar leaves, young poplars were exposed to 120 ppb O 3 

### 35

for 13

- h/day for up to 28 days ( Bohler et al., 2010 ) . Impacts on protein quantity only 

### 36

o ccurred after the plants had been exposed to O 3 for 14 days, and at this point in time, 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 21 June 2012 several Calvin cycle enzymes were reduced in quantity, while the effects on the light 

### 1 reactions appeared later, at 21 days after beginning treatment. Some of the antiox idant 

### 2 enzymes increased in abundance with O 3 treatment, while others (ascorbate peroxidase) 

### 3 did not. In relationship to leaf expansion, it was shown that O 3 did not affect protein 

### 4 quantity until leaves had reached full expansion, after about 7 days ( Bohler et al., 2010 )

. 

### 5

Two

- week

- old rice seedlings e xposed to varying levels of O 3 (4, 40, 80, 120 ppb) in a 

### 6 growth chamber for 9 days showed reductions in quantities of proteins associated with 

### 7 photosynthesis and energy metabolism, and increases in some antioxidant and defense 

### 8 related proteins ( Feng et a l., 2008a ) . A subsequent study of O 3 - treated rice seedlings 

### 9 (exposed to 200 ppb O 3 for 24 hours) focusing on the integration of transcriptomics and 

### 10 proteomics, supported and further enhanced these results ( Cho et al., 2008 ) . The authors 

### 11

found that of the 2 2,000 genes analyzed from the rice genome, 1,535 were differentially 

### 12 regulated by O 3 . Those differentially regulated genes were functionally categorized as 

### 13 transcription factors, MAPK cascades, those encoding for enzymes involved in the 

### 14 synthesis of jasmon ic acid (JA), ethylene (ET), shikimate, tryptophan and lignin, and 

### 15 those involved in glycolysis, the citric acid cycle, oxidative respiration and 

### 16 photosynthesis. The authors determined that the proteome and metabolome (all small 

### 17

molecule metabolites in a c ell) analysis supported the results of the transcriptome 

### 18 changes described above ( Cho et al., 2008 ) . This type of study, which ties together results 

### 19 from changes in gene expression, protein quantity and activity, and metabolite levels, 

### 20 provides the most complete pi cture of the molecular and biochemical changes occurring 

### 21 in plants exposed to a stressor such as O 3
. 

### 22

Sarkar et al. (2010 ) compared proteomes of two cultivars of whe at grown in OTCs at 

### 23

several O 3 concentrations, including filtered air, ambient O 3 (mean concentration 47 ppb), 

### 24

ambient + 10 ppb and ambient + 20 ppb for 5 h/day for 50 days. Declines in the rate of 

### 25 photosynthesis and stomatal conductance were related to de creases in proteins involved 

### 26

in carbon fixation and electron transport and increased proteolysis of photosynthetic 

### 27 proteins such as the large subunit of ribulose

- 1,6

- bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase 

### 28 (Rubisco). Enzymes that take part in energy metabolism, such as ATP synthesis, were 

### 29 also downregulated, while defense/stress related proteins were upregulated in O 3 - treated 

### 30 plants. In comparing the two wheat cultivars, Sark ar et al. (2010 ) found that while the 

### 31 qualitative changes in protein expression between the two cultivars were similar, the 

### 32 magnitude of these changes differed between the sensitive and tolerant wheat cultivars. 

### 33 Greater foliar injury and a smaller decli ne in stomatal conductance was observed in the 

### 34 sensitive cultivar as compared to the more tolerant cultivar, along with greater losses in 

### 35 photosynthetic enzymes and higher quantities of antioxidant enzymes. Results from a 

### 36

three

- year exposure of European be ech saplings to elevated O 3 (AOT40 value was 

### 37

52.6 μL/L • h for 2006 when trees were sampled) supported the results from the short

- term 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 22 June 2012 exposure studies described above ( Kerner et al., 2011 ) . The O 3 treatment of the saplings 

### 1 resulted in reductions in enzymes associated with the Calvin cycle, which could lead to 

### 2 reduced carbon fixation. Enzymes associated with carbon metabol ism/catabolism were 

### 3 increased, and quantities of starch and sucrose were reduced in response to the O 3 

### 4 treatment in these trees, indicating a potential impact of O 3 on overall carbon metabolism 

### 5 in long

- term exposure conditions ( Kerner et al., 2011 )

. 

### 6

Transcriptome and proteome studies have provided valuable information about O 3 effects 

### 7 on plants. These studies allow for simultaneous analysis of changes in the expression 

### 8 patterns of many different genes and proteins, and also provide information on how these 

### 9 molecules might interact with one another as a result of plant exposure to oxidative 

### 10 stress. Gene and protein expression patterns generally differ between O 3 - sensitive and 

### 11 tolerant plants, which could result from differential uptake or detoxification of O 3 or from 

### 12 differential regulation of the transcriptome and proteome. 

### 13

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 23 June 2012 Note: (A) Temporal profile of the oxidative stress response to ozone. The biphasic ozone

- induced oxidative burst is represented in black, with the ROS control measurements shown as a broken line. Average transcript profiles are shown for early upregulat ed genes (yellow, peaks at 0.5

- 1 hours), and the 3 hours (blue), 4.5 hours (red) and 9

- 12 hours (green) late upregulated genes and for the downregulated genes coding for photosynthesis proteins (brown). (B) Diagrammatic representation of redox regulation of t he oxidative stress response. Source: Reprinted with permission of Springer ( Mahalingam et al., 2005 )

.



### Figure 9

- 5 Composite diagram of major themes in the temporal evolution of the genetic response to ozone stress.

All of these studies describe common trends for changes in gene and protein expression 

### 1 which occur in a variety of plant species exposed to O 3 . While genes associated with 

### 2

carbon assimilation and general metabolism are typically downregulated, genes 

### 3 associated with signaling, catabolism, and defense are upregulated. The magnitude of 

### 4 these changes in gene and protein ex pression appears to be related to plant species, age 

### 5 and their sensitivity or tolerance to O 3
. 

### 6averaged (normalized)transcript profiles forgene groups

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 24 June 2012 9.3.3.3 Role of Phytohormones in Plant Response to Ozone

Many studies of O 3 effects on plants have analyzed the importance of plant hormones 

### 1 such as SA, ET and JA in determining plant response to O 3 . The 2006 O 3 AQCD 

### 2

documents the O 3 - induced production of ET and its role in promoting the formation of 

### 3 leaf lesions. Transcriptome a nalysis and the use of a variety of mutants have allowed for 

### 4 further elucidation of the complex interactions between SA, ET, JA and the role of 

### 5 abscisic acid (ABA) in mediating plant response to O 3 ( Ludwikow and Sadowski, 2008 )

. 

### 6 In addition to their roles in signaling pathways, phytohormones also appear to regulate, 

### 7 and be regulated by, the MAPK signaling cascades describe d previously. Most evidence 

### 8 suggests that while ET and SA are needed to develop O 3 - induced leaf lesions, JA acts 

### 9 antagonistically to SA and ET to limit the lesions ( Figure 9

- 6 ) ( Kangasjarvi et al., 2005 )

. 

### 10

The rapid production of ET in O 3 treated plants has been described in many plant species 

### 11 and has been further characterized through the use of a variety of mutants that either 

### 12

over

- produce or are insensitive to ET. Production of stress ET in O 3 - treated p lants, which 

### 13 is thought to be part of a wounding response, was found to be correlated to the degree of 

### 14 injury development in leaves ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . More recent studies have supported 

### 15 these conclusions and have also focused on the interactions occurring between several 

### 16

oxidative

- stress induced phytohormones. Yoshida et al. (2009 ) determined that ET likely 

### 17 amplifies the oxidative signal generated by ROS, thereby promoting lesion formation. By 

### 18 analyzing the O 3 - induced trans criptome of several Arabidopsis mutants of the Col

- 0 

### 19

ecotype, Tamaoki et al. (2003 ) determined that at 12 hours after initiating the O 3 

### 20
exposure (200 ppb for 12 hours), the ET and JA signaling pathways were the main 

### 21 pathways used to activate plant defense responses, with a lesser role for SA. The authors 

### 22 also demonstrated that low levels of ET production could stimulate the expression of 

### 23 defense genes, rather than promoting cell death which occurs when ET production is 

### 24 high. Tosti et al. (2006 ) supported these findings by showing that plant exposure to O 3 

### 25 not only results in activation of the biosynthetic pathways of ET, JA and SA, but also 

### 26 increases the expression of genes related to the signal transduction pathways of these 

### 27 phytohormones in O 3 - treated Arabidopsis plants (300 ppb O 3 for 6 hours). Conversely, in 

### 28

the O 3 sensitive Ws ecotype, its sensitivity may, in part, be due to intrin sically high ET 

### 29 levels leading to SA accumulation, and the high ET and SA may act to repress 

### 30

JA

- associated genes, which would serve to inhibit the spread of lesions ( Mahalingam et 

### 31
al., 2006 )

. Ogawa et al. (200 5 ) found that increases in SA in O 3 - treated plants leads to the 

### 32 formation of leaf lesions in tobacco plants exposed to 200 ppb O 3 for 6 hours. 

### 33 Furthermore, in transgenic tobacco plants with reduced levels of ET production in 

### 34
response to O 3 exposure, sev eral genes encoding for enzymes in the biosynthetic pathway 

### 35 of SA were suppressed, suggesting that SA levels are, in part, controlled by ET in the 

### 36 presence of O 3
. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 25 June 2012 Exposure of the Arabidopsis mutant rcd1 to acute doses of O 3 (250 ppb O 3 for 8

- h/day for 

### 1

3 da ys) resulted in programmed cell death (PCD) and the formation of leaf lesions 

### 2
( Overmyer et al., 2000 ) . They determined that the observed induction of ET synthesis 

### 3 promotes cell death, and that ET perception and signaling are required for the 

### 4 accumulation of superoxide , which leads to cell death and propagation of lesions. 

### 5 Jasmonic acid, conversely, contains the spread of leaf lesions ( Overmyer et al., 2000 )

. 

### 6 Transcriptome analysis of several Arabidopsis mutants, which are insensitive to SA, ET 

### 7 and JA, exposed to 12

- h of 200 ppb O 3 showed that approximately 78 of the upregulated 

### 8 genes measured in this study were controlled by ET and JA signaling pathways, while SA 

### 9 signaling pathways were suggested to antagonize ET and JA pathways ( Tamaoki et al., 

### 10

2003 ) . In a subsequent transcriptome study on the Col

- 0 ecotype exposed to 150 ppb O 3 

### 11

for 48

- h, JA and ET synthesis were downregulated, while SA was upregulated in O 3 - 

### 12 treated plants. In cotton plants exposed to a range of O 3 concentrations (0

- 120 ppb) and 

### 13 methyl jasmonate (MeJA)

, Grantz et al. (2010b ) determined that exogenous applications 

### 14 of MeJA did not protect plants from chronic O 3 exposure. 

### 15

Abscisic acid has been investigated for its role in regulating stomatal aperture and also 

### 16 for its contribution to signaling pathways in the plant. The role of ABA and the 

### 17

interaction between ABA and H 2 O 2 in O 3 - induced stomatal closure was described in the 

### 18

2006 O 3 AQCD. It was determined that the presence of H 2 O 2 , which is formed from O 3 

### 19 degradation, increases the sensitivity of guard cells to ABA and, therefore, more readily 

### 20 results in stomatal closure. More recently, it was determined that synthesis of ABA was 

### 21

induced in O 3 - treated Arabidopsis plants (250

- 350 ppb O 3 for 6 hours), with a more 

### 22 pronounced induction in the O 3 sensitive rcd3 mutant as compared to the wildtype Col

- 0 

### 23
( Overmyer et al., 2008 ) . The rcd3 mutant also exhibited a lack of O 3 - induced stomatal 

### 24 closure, and the RCD3 protein has been shown to be required for slow anion channels 

### 25
( Overmyer et al., 2008 )

. Ludwikow et al. (2009 ) used Arabidopsis ABI1td mutants, in 

### 26 which a key negative regulator of ABA action (abscisic acid insensitive1 protein 

### 27 ph osphatase 2C) has been knocked out, to examine O 3 responsive genes in this mutant 

### 28 compared to the Arabidopsis Col

- 0. Results of this study indicate a role for ABI1 in 

### 29 negatively regulating the synthesis of both ABA and ET in O 3 - treated plants (350 ppb O 3 

### 30

for 9 hours). Additionally, ABI1 may stimulate JA

- related gene expression, providing 

### 31 evidence for an antagonistic interaction between ABA and JA signaling pathways 

### 32
( Ludwikow et al., 2009 )

. 

### 33

Nitric oxide (NO) has also been shown to play a role in regulating gene expression in 

### 34 plants in response to O 3 exposure. However, little is known to date about NO and its role 

### 35 in the complex interactions of molecules in response to O 3 . Exposure of tobacco to O 3 

### 36
(150 ppb for 5 hours) stimulated NO and NO

- dependent ET production, while NO 

### 37 production itself did not depend on the presence of ET ( Ederli et al., 2006 ) . Analysis of 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 26 June 2012 O 3 - treated Arabidopsis indicated the possibility of a dual role for NO in the initiation of 

### 1

cell death and later lesion containment ( Ahlfors et al., 2009 )

. 

### 2

While much work remains to be done to better elucidate how plants detect O 3 , what 

### 3 determines their sensitivity to the pollutant and how they might respond to it, it is clear 

### 4

that the mechani sm for O 3 detection and signal transduction is very complex. Many of the 

### 5 phytohormones and other signaling molecules thought to be involved in these processes 

### 6 are interactive and depend upon a variety of other factors, which could be either internal 

### 7

or ext ernal to the plant. This results in a highly dynamic and complex system, capable of 

### 8 resulting in a spectrum of plant sensitivity to oxidative stress and generating a variety of 

### 9 plant responses to that stress. 

### 10

Note: Ozone

- derived radicals induce endogeno us ROS production (1) which results in salicylic acid (SA) accumulation and programmed cell death; (2) Cell death triggers ethylene (ET) production, which is required for the continuing ROS production responsible for the propagation of cell death; (3) Jasm onates counteract the progression of the cycle by antagonizing the cell death promoting function of SA and ET; (4) Abscisic acid (ABA) antagonizes ET function in many situations and might also have this role in ozone

- induced cell death; (5) Mutually antago nistic interactions between ET, SA and jasmonic acid (JA) are indicated with red bars. Source: Reprinted with permission of Blackwell Publishing Ltd. ( Kangasjarvi et al., 2005 )

.



### Figure 9

- 6 The oxidative cell death cycle.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 27 June 2012 9.3.4 Detoxification

9.3.4.1 Overview of Ozone

- induced Defense Mechanisms

Plants are exposed to an oxidizing environment on a continual basis, and many reactions 

### 1 that are part of the basic metabolic processes, such as photosynthesis and respiration, 

### 2 generate ROS. As a result, there is an extensive and complex mechanism in place to 

### 3 detoxify these oxidizing radicals, including both enzymes and metabolites, which are 

### 4 located in several locations in the cell and also in the apoplast of the cell. As O 3 enters the 

### 5 leaf through open stomata, the first point of contac t of O 3 with the plant is likely in the 

### 6 apoplast, where it breaks down to form oxidizing radicals such as H 2 O 2 , O 2 - , HO· and 

### 7

HO 2 . Another source of oxidizing radicals is an oxidative burst, generated by a 

### 8

membrane

- bound NADPH oxidase enzyme, which is recog nized as an integral 

### 9 component of the plant’s defense system against pathogens ( Schraudner et al., 1998 )

. 

### 10 Antioxidant metabolites and enzymes located in the apoplast are thought to form a first 

### 11 line of defense by detoxifying O 3 and/or the ROS that are formed as breakdown products 

### 12

of O 3 (Section 9.3.2 ). However, even with the presence of several antioxidants, including 

### 13 ascorbate, the redox buffering capacity of the apoplast is far less than that of the 

### 14 cytoplasm, as it lacks the regeneration systems necessary to retain a reduced pool of 

### 15

antioxidants ( Foyer and Noctor, 2005b )

. 

### 16

Redox homeostasis is regulated by the presence of a pool of antioxidants, which are 

### 17 typically found in a reduced state and detoxify ROS produced by oxidases or electron 

### 18

tra nsport components. As ROS increase due to environmental stress such as O 3 , it is 

### 19 unclear whether the antioxidant pool can maintain its reduced state ( Foyer and Noctor, 

### 20

2005b ) . As such, not only the quantity and types of antioxidant enzymes and metabolites 

### 21 present, but also the cellular ability to regenerate those antioxidants are important 

### 22 considerations in mechanisms of plant tolerance to oxidative stress ( Dizengremel et al., 

### 23

2008 ) . Molecules such as glutathione (GSH), thioredoxins and NADPH play very 

### 24 important roles in this rege neration process; additionally, it has been hypothesized that 

### 25

alterations in carbon metabolism would be necessary to supply the needed reducing 

### 26 power for antioxidant regeneration ( Dizengremel et al., 2008 )

. 

### 27

9.3.4.2 Role of Antioxidants in Plant Defense Responses

Ascorbate has been the focus of many different studies as an antioxidant metabolit e that 

### 28 protects plants from exposure to O 3 . It is found in several cellular locations, including the 

### 29 chloroplast, the cytosol and the apoplast ( Noctor and Foyer, 1998 ) . Ascorbate is 

### 30

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 28 June 2012 synthesized in the cell and transported to the apoplast. Apoplastic ascorbate c an be 

### 1 oxidized to dehydroascorbate (DHA) with exposure to O 3 and is then transported back to 

### 2 the cytoplasm. Here, DHA is reduced to ascorbate by the enzyme dehydroascorbate 

### 3 reductase (DHAR) and reduced GSH, which is part of the ascorbate

- glutathione cycle 

### 4
( Noctor and Foyer, 1998 ) . Many studies have focused on evaluating whether ascorbate is 

### 5 the primary determining factor in differential sensitivity of plants to O 3 . An evaluation of 

### 6 several species of wildflowers in Great Smoky Mountains National Park showed a 

### 7

co rrelation between higher quantities of reduced apoplastic ascorbate and lower levels of 

### 8 foliar injury from O 3 exposure in a field study on tall milkweed plants ( Asclepsias 

### 9

exaltata L.) ( Burkey et al., 2006 ; Souza et al., 2006 )

. Cheng et al. (2007 ) exposed two 

### 10 soybean cultivars to elevated O 3 (77 ppb) and filtered air for 7

- h/day for 6 day s. The 

### 11 differences in sensitivity between the two cultivars could not be explained by differential 

### 12

O 3 uptake or by the fraction of reduced ascorbate present in the apoplast. However, total 

### 13 antioxidant capacity of the apoplast was 2

- fold higher in the toler ant Essex cultivar as 

### 14 compared to the sensitive Forrest cultivar, indicating that there may be other compounds 

### 15 in the leaf apoplast that scavenge ROS. D'Haese et al. (2005 ) exposed the NC

- S 

### 16
(sensitive) and NC

- R (resistant) clones of white clover ( Trifoli um repens ) to 60 ppb O 3 

### 17

for 7

- h/day for 5 days in environmental chambers. Surprisingly, the NC

- S clone had a 

### 18 higher constitutive concentration of apoplastic ascorbate with a higher redox status than 

### 19

the NC

- R clone. However, the redox status of symplastic G SH was higher in NC

- R, even 

### 20 though the concentration of GSH was not higher than in NC

- S. In addition, total 

### 21 symplastic antioxidative capacity was not a determining factor in differential sensitivity 

### 22

between these two clones. Severino et al. (2007 ) also examined the role of antioxidants in 

### 23 the differential sensitivity of the two white clover clones by growing them in th e field for 

### 24 a growing season and then exposing them to elevated O 3 (100 ppb for 8

- h/day for 

### 25

10 days) in OTC at the end of the field season. The NC

- R clone had greater quantities of 

### 26

total ascorbate and total antioxidants than the NC

- S clone at the end of th e experiment. In 

### 27 snap bean, plants of the O 3 tolerant Provider cultivar had greater total ascorbate and more 

### 28 ascorbate in the apoplast than the sensitive S156 cultivar after exposure to 71 ppb O 3 for 

### 29

10 days in OTC ( Burkey et al., 2003 ) . While most of the apoplastic ascorbate was in the 

### 30 oxidized form, the ratio of reduced ascorbate to total ascorbate was higher in Provider 

### 31
than S156, i ndicating that Provider is better able to maintain this ratio to maximize plant 

### 32 protection from oxidative stress. Exposure of two wheat varieties to ambient (7

- h average 

### 33

44 ppb O 3 ) and elevated (7

- h average 56 ppb O 3 ) O 3 for 60 days in open

- air field 

### 34

condi tions showed higher concentrations of reduced ascorbate in the apoplast in the 

### 35 tolerant Y16 variety than the more sensitive Y2 variety, however no varietal differences 

### 36 were seen in the decrease in reduced ascorbate quantity in response to O 3 exposure ( Feng 

### 37

et a l., 2010 ) . There is much evidence that supports an important role for ascorbate, 

### 38 particularly apoplastic ascorbate, in protecting plants from oxidative stressors such as O 3 ; 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 29 June 2012 however, it is also clear that there is much variation in the importance of asc orbate for 

### 1 different plant species and differing exposure conditions. Additionally, the work of 

### 2 several authors suggests that there may be other compounds in the apoplast which have 

### 3 the capacity to act as antioxidants. 

### 4

While the quantities of antioxidant metabolites such as ascorbate are an important 

### 5 indicator of plant tolerance to O 3 , the ability of the plant to recycle oxidized ascorbate 

### 6 efficiently also plays a large role in determining the plant’s ability to effectively protect 

### 7

itself from sustained ex posure to oxidative stress. Tobacco plants over

- expressing DHAR 

### 8 were better protected from exposure to either chronic (100 ppb O 3 4

- h/day for 30 days) or 

### 9
acute (200 ppb O 3 for 2 hours) O 3 conditions than control plants and those with reduced 

### 10 expression of DHAR ( Chen and Gallie, 2005 ) . The DHAR over

- expressing plants 

### 11 exhibited an increase in guard cell ascorbic acid, leading to a decrease in stomatal 

### 12 responsiveness t o O 3 and an increase in stomatal conductance and O 3 uptake. Despite 

### 13 this, the presence of higher levels of ascorbic acid led to a lower oxidative load and a 

### 14 higher level of photosynthetic activity in the DHAR over

- expressing plants ( Chen and 

### 15
Gallie, 2005 ) . A subsequent study with tobacco plants over

- expressing DHAR confirmed 

### 16 some of these results. Levels of ascorbic acid were higher in the transgenic tobacco 

### 17 plants, and they exhibited greater tolerance to O 3 exposure (200 ppb O 3 ) as demonstrated 

### 18 by higher photosynthetic rates in the transgenic plants as compared to the control plants 

### 19
( Eltayeb et al., 2006 ) . Over

- expression of monodehydroascorbate reductase (MDAR) in 

### 20 tobacco plants also showed enhanced stress tolerance in response to O 3 exposure 

### 21
(200 ppb O 3 ), with higher rates of photosynthesis and higher levels of reduced ascorbic 

### 22

acid as c ompared to controls ( El tayeb et al., 2007 ) . Results of these studies demonstrate 

### 23 the importance of ascorbic acid as a detoxification mechanism in some plant species, and 

### 24 also emphasize that the recycling of oxidized ascorbate to maintain a reduced pool of 

### 25

ascorbate is a factor in determining plant tolerance to oxidative stress. 

### 26

The roles of other antioxidant metabolites and enzymes, including GSH, catalase (CAT), 

### 27 peroxidase (POD) and superoxide dismutase (SOD), were comprehensively reviewed in 

### 28

the 2006 O 3 AQCD. Based on t he review of the literature, no conclusive and consistent 

### 29

effects of O 3 on the quantity of GSH and CAT could be identified. Both apoplastic and 

### 30 cytosolic POD activity increased in response to O 3 exposure, while various isoforms of 

### 31

SOD showed inconsistent c hanges in quantity in response to O 3 . Additional studies have 

### 32 been conducted to further elucidate the roles of these antioxidant enzymes and 

### 33 metabolites in protecting plants from oxidative stress. Superoxide dismutase and POD 

### 34

activities were measured in bo th the tolerant Bel B and sensitive Bel W3 tobacco 

### 35 cultivars exposed to ambient O 3 concentrations for 2 weeks 3 times throughout a growing 

### 36

season ( Borowiak et al., 2009 ) . In this study, SOD and POD activity, including that of 

### 37
several different isoforms, increased in both the sensitive and tolerant tobacco cultivars 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 30 June 2012 with exposure to O 3 , however the isoenzyme composition for POD differed between the 

### 1

sensitive and tolerant tobacco cultivars ( Borowiak et al., 2009 ) Tulip poplar 

### 2
( Liriodendron tulipifera ) trees exposed to increasing O 3 concentrations (from 100 to 

### 3

300 ppb O 3 during a 2

- week period) showed increases in activities of SOD, ascorbate 

### 4 peroxidase (APX), glutathione reductase (GR) , MDAR, DHAR, CAT and POD in the 

### 5

2

- week period, although individual enzyme activities increased at different times during 

### 6

the 2

- week period ( Ryang et al., 2009 )

. 

### 7

Longer, chronic O 3 exposures in trees revealed increases in SOD and APX activity in 

### 8
Quercus mongolica after 45 days of plant exposure to 80 ppb O 3 , which were followed by 

### 9 declines in the activities and quantities of these enzymes after 75 days of exposure ( Yan 

### 10
et al., 2010 ) . Similarly, activities of SOD, APX, DHAR, MDAR, and GR increased in 

### 11
Gingko biloba trees during the first 50 days of exposure to 80 ppb O 3 , followed by 

### 12 decreases in activity below control values after 50 days of exposure ( He et al., 2006 )

. 

### 13 Soybean plants exposed to 70 or 100 ppb O 3 for 4

- h/day over the course of a growing 

### 14 season showed elevated POD activity and a decrease in CAT activity at 40 and 60 days 

### 15 after germination ( Singh et al., 2010a )

. 

### 16

Antioxidant enzymes and metabolites have been shown to play an important role in 

### 17 determining plant tolerance to O 3 and mediating plant responses to O 3 . However, there is 

### 18 also some evidence to suggest that the direct reaction of ascorbate with O 3 could lead to 

### 19 the formation of secondary toxicants, such as peroxy com pounds, which may act upon 

### 20 signal transduction pathways and modulate plant response to O 3 ( Sandermann, 2008 )

. 

### 21
Therefore, the role of ascorbate and other antioxidants and their interaction with other 

### 22 plant responses to O 3 , such as the activation of signal transduction pathways, is likely far 

### 23 more complex than is curre ntly understood. 

### 24

9.3.5 Effects on Primary and Secondary Metabolism

9.3.5.1 Light and Dark Reactions of Photosynthesis

Declines in the rate of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance in O 3 - treated plants have 

### 25 been documented for many different plant species ( Booker et al., 2009 ; Wittig et al., 

### 26

2007 ; U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . The 2006 O 3 AQCD described the mechanism by which plant 

### 27

exp osure to O 3 reduces the quantity of Rubisco, and the more recent scientific literature 

### 28 confirms these findings. While several measures of the light reactions of photosynthesis 

### 29 are sensitive to exposure to O 3 (see below), photosynthetic carbon assimilation is 

### 30 generally considered to be more affected by pollutant exposure, resulting in an overall 

### 31 decline in photosynthesis ( Guidi and Degl'lnnocenti, 2008 ; Heath, 2008 ; Fiscus et al., 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 31 June 2012 2005 ) . L oss of carbon assimilation capacity has been shown to result primarily from 

### 1 declines in the quantity of Rubisco ( Singh et al., 2009 ; Calatayud et al., 2007a )

. 

### 2 Experimental evidence suggests that both decreases in Rubisco synthesis and enhanced 

### 3 degradation of the protein contribute to the measured reduction in its quantity ( U.S. EPA, 

### 4

2006b ) . Reduced carbon assimilation has been linked to reductions in biomass and yield 

### 5
( Wang et al., 2009b ; He et al., 2007 ; Novak et al., 2007 ; Gregg et al., 2006 ; Keutgen et 

### 6
al., 2005 ) . Recent studies evaluating O 3 induced changes in the transcriptome and 

### 7 proteome of several different species confirm these findings. Levels of mRNA for the 

### 8

small s ubunit of Rubisco (rbcS) declined in European beech saplings exposed to 300 ppb 

### 9

O 3 for 8

- h/day for up to 26 days ( Olbrich et al., 2005 ) . Similar declines in rbcS mRNA 

### 10 were also measured in the beech saplings in a free air exposure system over a course of 

### 11 two growing seasons ( Olbrich et al., 2009 ) . Proteomics studies have also confirmed the 

### 12

effects of O 3 on proteins involved in carbon assimilation. R eductions in quantities of the 

### 13 small and large subunit (rbcL) of Rubisco and Rubisco activase were measured in 

### 14 soybean plants exposed to 120 ppb O 3 for 3 days in growth chambers ( Ahsan et al., 

### 15

2010 ) . Exposure of young poplar trees to 120 ppb O 3 for 35 days in exposure chambers 

### 16
resulted in reductions of Rubisco, Rub isco activase, and up to 24 isoforms of Calvin 

### 17 cycle enzymes, most of which play a role in regenerating the CO 2 acceptor molecule, 

### 18

ribulose

- 1.5

- bisphosphate ( Bohler et al., 2007 ) . Reductions in protein quantity of both the 

### 19 small and large subunit of Rubisco were seen in w heat plants exposed to ambient 

### 20 (average concentration 47.3 ppb O 3 ) and elevated O 3 (ambient + 10 or 20 ppb O 3 ) in 

### 21

open

- top chambers for 5

- h/day for 50 days ( Sarkar et al., 2010 )

. Lettuce plants exposed 

### 22

to 100 ppb O 3 in growth chambers for 8

- h/day for 3 weeks also showed reductions in 

### 23 transcript and protein levels of the small and large subunits of Rubisco and Rubisco 

### 24

activase ( Goumenaki et al., 2010 ) . The reductions in carbon assimilation have been 

### 25

associated with declines in bo th the mRNA of the small and large subunits of Rubisco, 

### 26 and with reductions in Rubisco activase mRNA and protein. Additionally, the reduction 

### 27 in Rubisco quantity has also been associated with the O 3 - induced oxidative modification 

### 28 of the enzyme, which is ev idenced by the increases in carbonyl groups on the protein 

### 29 after plant exposure to O 3
. 

### 30

In addition to impacts on carbon assimilation, the deleterious effects of O 3 on the 

### 31 photosynthetic light reactions have received more attention in recent years. Chlorop hyll 

### 32 fluorescence provides a useful measure of changes to the photosynthetic process from 

### 33 exposure to oxidative stress. Decreases in the Fv/Fm ratio (a measure of the maximum 

### 34 efficiency of Photosystem II) in dark adapted leaves indicate a decline in the ef ficiency of 

### 35 the PSII photosystems and a concomitant increase in non

- photochemical quenching 

### 36
( Guidi and Degl'lnnocenti, 2008 ; Scebba et al., 2006 ) . Changes in these parameters have 

### 37 been correlated to differential sensitivity of plants to the pollutant. In a study to evaluate 

### 38 the response of 4 maple species to O 3 (exposed to an 8

- h avg of 51 ppb for ambient and 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 32 June 2012 79 ppb for elevated treatment in OTC ), the 2 species which were most sensitive based on 

### 1 visible injury and declines in CO 2 assimilation also showed the greatest decreases in 

### 2 Fv/Fm in symptomatic leaves. In asymptomatic leaves, CO 2 assimilation decreased 

### 3 significa ntly but there was no signifi ca nt decline in Fv/Fm ( Calatayud et al., 2007a )

. 

### 4 Degl'Innocenti et al. (2007 ) measured significa nt decreases in Fv/Fm in young and 

### 5 symptomatic leaves of a resistant tomato ge notype (line 93.1033/1) in response to O 3 

### 6 exposure (150 ppb O 3 for 3 hours in a growth chamber), but only minor decreases in 

### 7 asymptomatic leaves with no associated changes in net photosynthetic rate. In the O 3 

### 8
sensitive tomato cultivar Cuor Di Bue, the Fv/ Fm ratio did not change, while the 

### 9 photosynthetic rate declined significa ntly in asymptomatic leaves ( Degl'Innocenti et al., 

### 10

2007 ) . In two soybean cultivars, Fv/Fm also declined significa ntly with plant exposure to 

### 11

O 3 ( Singh et al., 2009 ) . It appears that in asymptomatic leaves, photoinhibition, as 

### 12 indicated by a decrease in Fv/Fm, is not the main reason for a decline in photosynthesis. 

### 13

An evaluation of photosynthetic pa rameters of two white clover ( Trifolium repens cv. 

### 14 Regal) clones that differ in their O 3 sensitivity revealed that O 3 (40

- 110 ppb O 3 for 7

- 

### 15 h/day for 5 days) increased the coefficient of non

- photochemical quenching (q NP ) in both 

### 16
the resistant (NC

- R) and sen sitive (NC

- S) clones, however q NP was significa ntly lower 

### 17

for the sensitive clone ( Crous et al., 2006 ) . Sensitive Acer clones had a lower coefficient 

### 18

of non

- photochemical quenching, while exposure to O 3 increased q NP in both sensitive 

### 19

and tolerant clones ( Calatayud et al., 2007a ) . While exposure to O 3 also increased q NP in 

### 20
tomato, there were no differences in the coefficient of photochemical quenching between 

### 21 cultivars thought to be differentially sensitive to O 3 ( Degl'Innocenti et al., 2007 ) . Higher 

### 22

q NP as a result of exposure to O 3 indicates a reduction in the proportion of absorbed light 

### 23 energy being used to drive photochemistry. A lower coefficient of non

- photochemical 

### 24 quenching in O 3 sen sitive plants could indicate increased vulnerability to ROS generated 

### 25 during exposure to oxidative stress ( Crous et al., 2006 )

. 

### 26

Most of the research on O 3 effects on photosynthesis has focused on C3 (Calvin cycle) 

### 27 plants because C4 (Hatch

- Slack) plants have l ower stomatal conductance and are, 

### 28 therefore, thought to be less sensitive to O 3 stress. However, some studies have been 

### 29

conducted to evaluate the effects of O 3 on C4 photosynthesis. In older maize leaves, 

### 30
Leitao et al. (2007c ); Leitao et al. (2007a ) found that the activity, quantity and transcript 

### 31 levels of both Rubisco and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPc) decreased as a 

### 32 function of rising O 3 concentratio n. In younger maize leaves, the quantity, activity, and 

### 33 transcript levels of the carboxylases were either increased or unaffected in plants exposed 

### 34

to 40 ppb O 3 for 7

- h/day for 28

- 33 days, but decreased at 80 ppb ( Leitao et al., 2007b ; 

### 35
Leitao et al., 2007c ) . In another study, Grantz and Vu (2009 ) reported that O 3 exposures 

### 36
(4, 58, and 114 ppb, 12

- hour mean) decreased sugarcane biomass production by more 

### 37 than one third and allocation to roots by more than two thirds. 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 33 June 2012 9.3.5.2 Respiration and Dark Respiration

While much research emphasis regarding O 3 effects on plants has focused on the negative 

### 1 impacts on carbon assimilation, other studies have measured impacts on catabolic 

### 2 pathways such as shoot respiration and photorespiration. Generally, shoot respiration has 

### 3

been found to in crease in plants exposed to O 3 . Bean plants exposed to ambient (average 

### 4

12

- h mean 43 ppb) and twice ambient (average 12

- h mean 80 ppb) O 3 showed increases 

### 5 in respiration. When mathematically partitioned, the maintenance coefficient of 

### 6 respiration was significa ntly increased in O 3 treated plants, while the growth coefficient 

### 7 of respiration was not affected ( Amthor, 1988 ) . Loblolly pines were exposed to ambient 

### 8
(12

- h daily mean was 45 ppb) and twice ambient (12 hours daily mean was 86 ppb) O 3 

### 9

for 12

- h/day for approximately seven months per year for 3 and 4 years. While 

### 10 photosynthetic activity declined with the age of the needles and increasing O 3 

### 11 concentration, enzymes associated with respir ation showed higher levels of activity with 

### 12 increasing O 3 concentration ( Dizengremel et al., 1994 ) . In their review on the role of 

### 13 metabolic changes in plant redox status after O 3 exposure, Dizengremel et al. (2009 ) 

### 14 summarized multiple studies in which several different tree species were exposed to O 3 

### 15

concentrat ions ranging from ambient to 200 ppb O 3 for at least several weeks. In all 

### 16 cases, the activity of enzymes, including phosphofructokinase, pyruvate kinase and 

### 17 fumarase, which are part of several catabolic pathways, were increased in O 3 treated 

### 18 plants. 

### 19

Photo respiration is a light

- stimulated process which consumes O 2 and releases CO 2
. 

### 20 While it has been regarded as a wasteful process, more recent evidence suggests that it 

### 21 may play a role in photoprotection during photosynthesis ( Bagard et al., 2008 ) . The few 

### 22

studies that have been conducted on O 3 effects on photorespiration suggest that rates of 

### 23 photorespiration decline concomitantly with rates of photosynthesis. Soybean plants were 

### 24 exposed to ambi ent (daily averages 43

- 58 ppb) and 1.5 ambient O 3 (daily averages 63

- 

### 25

83 ppb) O 3 in OTCs for 12

- h/day for 4 months. Rates of photosynthesis and 

### 26 photorespiration and photorespiratory enzyme activity declined only at the end of the 

### 27 growing season and did not appear to be very sensitive to O 3 exposure ( Booker et al., 

### 28

1997 ) . Young hybrid poplars exposed to 120 ppb O 3 for 13

- h/day for 35 days in 

### 29 phytotron chambers showed that effects on photorespiration and photosynthesis were 

### 30 dependent upon the developmental stage of the leaf. While young leaves were not 

### 31 impacted, reductions in photosynthesis and photorespiration were measured in fully 

### 32 expanded leaves ( Bagard et al., 2008 )

. 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 34 June 2012 9.3.5.3 Secondary Metabolism

Transcriptome analysis of Arabidopsis plants has revealed modulation of several genes 

### 1 involved in plant secondar y metabolism ( Ludwikow and Sadowski, 2008 ) . Phenylalanine 

### 2 ammonia lyase (PAL) has been the focus of many studies involv ing plant exposure to O 3 

### 3 due to its importance in linking the phenylpropanoid pathway of plant secondary 

### 4 metabolism to primary metabolism in the form of the shikimate pathway. Genes encoding 

### 5 several enzymes of the phenylpropanoid pathway and lignin biosynt hesis were 

### 6 upregulat ed in transcriptome analysis of Arabidopsis plants (Col

- 0) exposed to 350 ppb 

### 7

O 3 for 6 hours, while 2 genes involved in flavonoid biosynthesis were downregulat ed 

### 8
( Ludwikow et al., 2004 ) . Exposure of Arabidopsis (Col

- 0) to lower O 3 concentrations 

### 9
(150 ppb for 8

- h/day for 2 days) resulted in the induction of 11 transcripts involved in 

### 10 flavonoid synthesis. In their exposure of 2

- year

- old Mediterranean shrub Phillyrea 

### 11
latifolia to 110 ppb O 3 for 90 days, Paolac ci et al. (2007 ) identified four clones that were 

### 12 upregulat ed and corresponded to genes involved in the synthesis of secondary 

### 13 metabolites, such as isoprenoids, poly amines and phenylpropanoids. Up regulation of 

### 14 genes involved in isoprene synthesis was al so observed in Medicago trunculata exposed 

### 15

to 300 ppb O 3 for 6 hours, while genes encoding enzymes of the flavonoid s ynthesis 

### 16 pathway were either upregulated or down regulated ( Puckette et al., 2008 ) . Exposure of 

### 17

red clover to 1.5 × ambient O 3 (average concentrations of 32.4 ppb) for up to 9 weeks in 

### 18 an open field exposure system resulted in increases in leaf total phenolic content. 

### 19 However, the types of phenolics that were increased in r esponse to O 3 exposure differed 

### 20 depending upon the developmental stage of the plant. While almost all of the 31 different 

### 21 phenolic compounds measured increased in quantity initially during the exposure, after 

### 22

3 weeks the quantity of isoflavones decreased w hile other phenolics increased ( Saviranta 

### 23
et al., 2010 ) . Exposure of beech saplings to ambient and 2 × ambient O 3 concentrations 

### 24 over 2 growing seasons resulted in the induction of several enzymes which contribute to 

### 25 lignin formation, while enzymes involved in flavonoid biosynthesis were downregulat ed 

### 26
( Olbrich et al., 2009 ) . Exposure of tobacco Bel W3 to 160 ppb O 3 for 5 ho urs showed 

### 27 upregulat ion of almost all genes encoding for enzymes which are part of the 

### 28 prechorismate pathway ( Janzik et al., 2005 ) . Isoprenoids can serve as antioxidant 

### 29 compounds in plants exposed to oxidative stress ( Paolacci et al ., 2007 )

. 

### 30

The prechorismate pathway is the pathway leading to the formation of chorismate, a 

### 31 precursor to the formation of the aromatic amino acids tryptophan, tyrosine and 

### 32 phenylalanine. These amino acids are precursors for the formation of many secon dary 

### 33 aromatic compounds, and, therefore, the prechorismate pathway represents a branch



### 34 point in the regulation of metabolites into either primary or secondary metabolism ( Janzik 

### 35
et al., 2005 ) . Expo sure of the O 3 sensitive Bel W3 tobacco cultivar at 160 ppb for 5 hours 

### 36 showed an increase in transcript levels of most of the genes encoding enzymes of the 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 35 June 2012 prechorismate pathway. However, shikimate kinase (SK) did not show any change in 

### 1 transcript levels and only one of three isoforms of DAHPS (3

- deoxy

- D

- arabino



### 2 heptulosonat

- 7

- phosphate synthase), the first enzyme in this pathway, was induced by O 3 

### 3

exposure ( Janzik et al., 2005 ) . Differential induc tion of DAHPS isoforms was also 

### 4 observed in European beech after 40 days of exposure to 150

- 190 ppb O 3 . At this time 

### 5 point in the beech experiment, transcript levels of shikimate pathway enzymes, including 

### 6 SK, were generally strongly induced after an only weak initial induction after the first 

### 7

40 days of exposure. Both soluble and cell

- wall bound phenolic metabolites showed only 

### 8 minimal increases in response to O 3 for the duration of the exposure period ( Alonso et al., 

### 9

2007 ) . Total leaf phenolics decreased with leaf age in Populus nigra exposed to 80 ppb 

### 10

O 3 for 12

- h/day for 14 days. Ozone increased the concentration of total leaf phenolics in 

### 11 newly expanded leaves, with the greatest increases occurring in compounds such as 

### 12 quercitin glycoside, which has a high antioxidant ca pacity ( Fares et al., 2010b ) . While 

### 13 several phenylpropanoid pathway enzymes were induced in two poplar clones exposed to 

### 14

60 ppb O 3 for 5

- h/day for 15 days, the degree of induction differed between the two 

### 15

clones. In the tolerant I

- 214 clone, PAL activity increased 9

- fold in O 3 - treated plants as 

### 16 compared to controls, while there was no significa nt difference in PAL activity in the 

### 17

sensitive Eridano clone ( DiBaccio et al., 2008 )

. 

### 18

Polyamines such as putrescine, spermidine and spermi ne play a variety of roles in plants 

### 19 and have been implicated in plant defense responses to both abiotic and biotic stresses. 

### 20 They exist in both a free form and conjugated to hydroxycinnamic acids. Investigations 

### 21 on the role of polyamines have found that l evels of putrescine increase in response to 

### 22 oxidative stress. This increase stems largely from the increase in the activity of arginine 

### 23 decarboxylase (ADC), a key enzyme in the synthesis of putrescine ( Groppa and 

### 24
Benavides, 2008 )

. Lange bartels et al. (1991 ) described differences in putrescine 

### 25

accumulation in O 3 - treated tobacco plants exposed to several O 3 concentrations, ranging 

### 26

from 0

- 400 ppb for 5

- 7 hours. A large and rapid increase in putrescine occurred in the 

### 27

tolerant Bel B culti var and only a small increase in the sensitive Bel W3 cultivar, which 

### 28 occurred only after the formation of necrotic leaf lesions. Van Buuren et al. (2002 ) 

### 29 further examined the role of polyamines in these two tobacco cultivars during an acute 

### 30
(130 ppb O 3 for 7

- h in a growth chamber) exposure. They found that while free 

### 31 putrescine accumulated in undamaged tissue of both cultivars, conjugated putrescine 

### 32 predominantly accumulated in tissues undergoing cell death after plant exposure to O 3 

### 33
( Van Buuren et al., 2002 ) . The authors suggest that while free putr escine may not play a 

### 34 role in conferring tolerance in the Bel B cultivar, conjugated putrescine may play a role in 

### 35

O 3 - induced programmed cell death in Bel W3 plants. 

### 36

Isoprene is emitted by some plant species and represents the predominant biogenic source 

### 37

o f hydrocarbon emissions in the atmosphere ( Guenther et al., 2006 ) . In the atmosphere, 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 36 June 2012 the oxidation of isoprene by hydroxyl radicals can enhance O 3 formation in the presence 

### 1

of NO X , thereby impacting the O 3 concentration that plants ar e exposed to. While 

### 2 isoprene emission varies widely between species, it has been proposed to stabilize 

### 3 membranes and provide those plant species that produce it with a mechanism of 

### 4

thermotolerance ( Sharkey et al., 2008 ) . It has also bee n suggested that isoprene may act 

### 5 as an antioxidant compound to scavenge O 3 ( Loreto and Velikova, 2001 ) . Recent studies 

### 6 using a variety of plant species have shown conflicting results in trying to understand the 

### 7

effects of O 3 on isoprene emission. Exposure to acute doses of O 3 (300 ppb for 3

- h) in 

### 8

detached leaves of Phragmites australis resulted in stimulation of isoprene emissio ns 

### 9
( Velikova et al., 2005 ) . Similar increases in isoprene emissions were mea sured in 

### 10
Populus nigra after exposure to 100 ppb O 3 for 5 days continuously ( Fares et al., 2008 )

. 

### 11 Isoprene emission in attached leaves of Populus alba , which were exposed to 150 ppb O 3 

### 12

for 11

- h/day for 30 days inside cuvettes, was inhibited, while isoprene emission and 

### 13 transcript levels of isoprene synthase mRNA were increased in the leaves exposed to 

### 14

ambient O 3 (40 ppb), which were located above th e leaves enclosed in the exposure 

### 15

cuvettes ( Fares et al., 2006 ) . Exposure of 2 genotypes of hybrid poplar to 120 ppb O 3 for 

### 16

6

- h/day f or 8 days resulted in a significa nt reduction in isoprene emission in the O 3 - 

### 17 sensitive but not the tolerant genotype ( Ryan et al., 2009 ) . Similarly, O 3 treatment 

### 18
(80 ppb 12

- h/day for 14 days) of Populus nigra showed that isoprene emission was 

### 19 reduced in the treated plants re lative to the control plants ( Fares et al., 2010b ) . Based on 

### 20
results of this and other studies, Fares et al. (2010b ) concluded that the isoprenoid 

### 21 pathway may be induced in plants exposed to acute O 3 doses, while at lower doses 

### 22 isoprene emission may be inhibited. Vickers et al. (2009 ) developed transgenic tobacco 

### 23 plants with the isoprene synthase gene from Populus alba and exposed them to 120 ppb 

### 24

O 3 for 6

- h/day for 2 days. They determined that the wildtype plants showed significa ntly 

### 25

more O 3 damage, including the development of leaf lesions and a decline in 

### 26 photosynthetic rates, than the transgenic, isoprene

- emitting plants. Transgenic plants also 

### 27

accumulated less H 2 O 2 and had lower levels of lipid peroxidation following exposure to 

### 28

O 3 than the wildtype plants ( Vickers et al., 2009 ) . These results indicate that isoprene 

### 29 may have a protective role for plants exp osed to oxidative stress. 

### 30

9.3.6 Summary

The results of recent studies on the effects of O 3 stress on plants support and strengthen 

### 31 those reported in the 2006 O 3 AQCD. The most significa nt new body of evidence since 

### 32

the 2006 O 3 AQCD comes from research on molecul ar mechanisms of the biochemical 

### 33 and physiological changes observed in many plant species in response to O 3 exposure. 

### 34 Recent studies have employed new techniques, such as those used in evaluating 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 37 June 2012 transcriptomes and proteomes to perform very comprehensive a nalyses of changes in 

### 1 gene transcription and protein expression in plants exposed to O 3 . These newer molecular 

### 2 studies not only provide very important information regarding the many mechanisms of 

### 3 plant responses to O 3 , they also allow for the analysis of i nteractions between various 

### 4 biochemical pathways which are induced in response to O 3 . However, many of these 

### 5 studies have been conducted in artificial conditions with model plants, which are 

### 6 typically exposed to very high, short doses of O 3 . Therefore, add itional work remains to 

### 7 elucidate whether these plant responses are transferable to other plant species exposed to 

### 8

more realistic ambient conditions. 

### 9

Ozone is taken up into leaves through open stomata. Once inside the substomatal cavity, 

### 10

O 3 is thought to rapidly react with the aqueous layer surrounding the cell (apoplast) to 

### 11 form breakdown products such as hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ), superoxide (O 2 ־ hydroxyl , ) 

### 12
radicals (HO · ) and peroxy radicals (HO 2 · ). Plants could be detecting the presence of O 3 

### 13

and/or its breakdown products in a variety different ways, depending upon the plant 

### 14 species and the exposure parameters. Experimental evidence suggests that mitogen



### 15 activated protein kinases and calcium are important components of the signal 

### 16 transduction pathways, wh ich communicate signals to the nucleus and lead to changes in 

### 17 gene expression in response to O 3 . It is probable that there are multiple detection 

### 18 mechanisms and signal transduction pathways, and their activation may depend upon the 

### 19 plant species, its devel opmental stage and/or O 3 exposure conditions. Initiation of signal 

### 20 transduction pathways in O 3 treated plants has also been observed in stomatal guard cells. 

### 21 Reductions in stomatal conductance have been described for many plant species exposed 

### 22

to O 3 , and n ew experimental evidence suggests that this reduction may be due not only to 

### 23 a decrease in carboxylation efficiency, but also to a direct impact of O 3 on stomatal guard 

### 24 cell function, leading to a changes in stomatal conductance. 

### 25

Alterations in gene trans cription that have been observed in O 3 - treated plants are now 

### 26 evaluated more comprehensively using DNA microarray studies, which measure changes 

### 27 in the entire transcriptome rather than measuring the transcript levels of individual genes. 

### 28

These studies have demonstrated very consistent trends, even though O 3 exposure 

### 29 conditions (concentration, duration of exposure), plant species and sampling times vary 

### 30 significa ntly. Genes involved in plant defense, signaling, and those associated with the 

### 31 synthesis of plan t hormones and secondary metabolism are generally upregulat ed in 

### 32 plants exposed to O 3 , while those related to photosynthesis and general metabolism are 

### 33 typically downregulat ed. Proteome studies support these results by demonstrating 

### 34

concomitant increases o r decreases in the proteins encoded by these genes. Transcriptome 

### 35 analysis has also illuminated the complex interactions that exist between several different 

### 36 phytohormones and how they modulate plant sensitivity and response to O 3
. 

### 37 Experimental evidence su ggests that while ethylene and salicylic acid are needed to 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 38 June 2012 develop O 3 - induced leaf lesions, jasmonic acid acts antagonistically to ethylene and 

### 1 salicylic acid to limit the spread of the lesions. Abscisic acid, in addition to its role in 

### 2 regulating stomatal aperture, may also act antagonistically to the jasmonic acid signaling 

### 3 pathway. Changes in the quantity and activity of these phytohormones and the 

### 4 interactions between them reveal some of the complexity of plant responses to an 

### 5

oxidative stressor such as O 3
. 

### 6

Another critical area of interest is to better understand and quantify the capacity of the 

### 7 plant to detoxify oxygen radicals using antioxidant metabolites, such as ascorbate and 

### 8 glutathione, and the enzymes that regenerate them. Ascorbate rem ains an important focus 

### 9 of research, and, due to its location in the apoplast in addition to other cellular 

### 10 compartments, it is regarded as a first line of defense against oxygen radicals formed in 

### 11 the apoplast. Most studies demonstrate that antioxidant me tabolites and enzymes increase 

### 12 in quantity and activity in plants exposed to O 3 , indicating that they play an important 

### 13 role in protecting plants from oxidative stress. However, attempts to quantify the 

### 14 detoxification capacity of plants have remained unsuc cessful, as high quantities of 

### 15 antioxidant metabolites and enzymes do not always translate into greater protection of the 

### 16 plant. Considerable variation exists between plant species, different developmental 

### 17 stages, and the environmental and O 3 exposure cond itions which plants are exposed to. 

### 18

As indicated earlier, the described alterations in transcript levels of genes correlate with 

### 19 observed changes quantity and activity of the enzymes and metabolites involved in 

### 20 primary and secondary metabolism. In additio n to the generalized upregulat ion of the 

### 21 antioxidant defense system, photosynthesis typically declines in O 3 treated plants. 

### 22

Declines in C fixation due to reductions in quantity and activity of Rubisco were 

### 23 extensively described in the 2006 O 3 AQCD. More r ecent studies support these results 

### 24 and indicate that declines in Rubisco activity may also result from reductions in Rubisco 

### 25 activase enzyme quantity. Other studies, which have focused on the light reactions of 

### 26 photosynthesis, demonstrate that plant expos ure to O 3 results in declines in electron 

### 27 transport efficiency and a decreased capacity to quench oxidizing radicals. Therefore, the 

### 28 overall declines in photosynthesis observed in O 3 - treated plants likely result from 

### 29 combined impacts on stomatal conductanc e, carbon fixation and the light reactions. 

### 30 While photosynthesis generally declines in plants exposed to O 3 , catabolic pathways such 

### 31 as respiration have been shown to increase. It has been hypothesized that increased 

### 32 respiration may result from greater ene rgy needs for defense and repair. Secondary 

### 33 metabolism is generally upregulat ed in a variety of species exposed to O 3 as a part of a 

### 34 generalized plant defense mechanism. Some secondary metabolites, such as flavonoids 

### 35 and polyamines, are of particular inter est as they are known to have antioxidant 

### 36 properties. The combination of decreases in C assimilation and increases in catabolism 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 39 June 2012 and the production of secondary metabolites would negatively impact plants by 

### 1 decreasing the energy available for growth and re production. 

### 2



## 9.4 Nature of Effects on Vegetation and Ecosystems

9.4.1 Introduction

Ambient O 3 concentrations have long been known to cause visible symptoms, decreases 

### 3 in photosynthetic rates, decreases in growth and yield of plants as well as many other 

### 4

effects on ec osystems ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996c

, 1986

, 1978a ) . Numerous studies have 

### 5

related O 3 exposure to plant responses, with most effort focused on the yield of crops and 

### 6 the growth of tree seedlings. Many experiments exposed i ndividual plants grown in pots 

### 7

or soil under controlled conditions to known concentrations of O 3 for a segment of 

### 8 daylight hours for some portion of the plant’s life span. Information in this section also 

### 9 goes beyond individual plant

- scale responses to con sider effects at the broader ecosystem 

### 10 scale, including effects related to ecosystem services. 

### 11

This section will focus mainly on studies published since the release of the 2006 O 3 

### 12
AQCD. However, because much O 3 research was conducted prior to the 2006 O 3 AQCD, 

### 13 the present discussion of vegetation and ecosystem response to O 3 exposure is largely 

### 14
based on the conclusions of the 1978, 1986, 1996, and 2006 O 3 AQCDs. 

### 15

9.4.1.1 Ecosystem Scale, Function, and Structure

Information presented in this section was collected at multiple spatial scales or levels of 

### 16 biological organization, ranging from the physiology of a given species to population, 

### 17 community, and ecosystem investigations. An ecological population is a group of 

### 18 individuals of the same species and a community is an assemblage of populations of 

### 19 different species interacting with one another that inhabit an area. For this assessment, 

### 20 “ecosystem” is defined as the interactive system formed from all living organism s and 

### 21 their abiotic (physical and chemical) environment within a given area ( IPCC, 2007a ) . The 

### 22 boundaries of what could be called an ecosystem are somewhat arbitrary, depending on 

### 23

the focus of interest or study. Thus, the extent of an ecosystem may range from very 

### 24 small spatial scales or levels of biological organization to, ultimately, the entire Earth 

### 25
( IPCC, 2007a ) . All ecosystems, regardless of siz e or complexity, have interactions and 

### 26 physical exchanges between biota and abiotic factors, this includes both structural 

### 27

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 40 June 2012 (e.g., soil type and food web trophic levels) and functional (e.g., energy flow, 

### 1 decomposition, nitrification) attributes. 

### 2

Ecosystem s can be described, in part, by their structure, i.e., the number and type of 

### 3 species present. Structure may refer to a variety of measurements including the species 

### 4 richness, abundance, community composition and biodiversity as well as landscape 

### 5

attribute s. Competition among and within species and their tolerance to environmental 

### 6 stressors are key elements of survivorship. When environmental conditions are shifted, 

### 7 for example, by the presence of anthropogenic air pollution, these competitive 

### 8 relationships may change and tolerance to stress may be exceeded. Ecosystems may also 

### 9 be defined on a functional basis. “Function” refers to the suite of processes and 

### 10 interactions among the ecosystem components and their environment that involve 

### 11 nutrient and energy fl ow as well as other attributes including water dynamics and the flux 

### 12 of trace gases. Plants, via such processes as photosynthesis, respiration, C allocation, 

### 13 nutrient uptake and evaporation, affect energy flow, C, nutrient cycling and water 

### 14 cycling. The en ergy accumulated and stored by vegetation (via photosynthetic C capture) 

### 15 is available to other organisms. Energy moves from one organism to another through 

### 16 food webs, until it is ultimately released as heat. Nutrients and water can be recycled. Air 

### 17 polluti on alters the function of ecosystems when elemental cycles or the energy flow are 

### 18 altered. This alteration can also be manifested in changes in the biotic composition of 

### 19

ecosystems. 

### 20

There are at least three levels of ecosystem response to pollutants: (1) the individual 

### 21 organism and its environment; (2) the population and its environment; and (3) the 

### 22 biological community composed of many species and their environment ( Billings, 1978 )

. 

### 23 Individual organisms within a popula tion vary in their ability to withstand the stress of 

### 24 environmental change. The response of individual organisms within a population is based 

### 25 on their genetic constitution, stage of growth at time of exposure to stress, and the 

### 26 microhabitat in which they a re growing ( Levine and Pinto, 1998 ) . The stress range within 

### 27 which organisms can exist and function determines the ab ility of the population to 

### 28

survive. 

### 29

9.4.1.2 Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem structure and function may be translated into ecosystem services. Ecosystem 

### 30 services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems ( UNEP, 2003 ) . Ecosystems 

### 31 provide many goods and services that are of vital importance for the functioning of the 

### 32 biosphere and provide the basis for the delivery of tangible benefits to human society. 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 41 June 2012 Hassan et al. (2005 ) define these benefits to include supporting, provisioning, regulating, 

### 1

and cultural services: 

### 2

 Supporting services are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem 

### 3 services. Some examples include biomass produ ction, production of 

### 4 atmospheric O 2 , soil formation and retention, nutrient cycling, water cycling, 

### 5 and provisioning of habitat. Biodiversity is a supporting service that is 

### 6 increasingly recognized to sustain many of the goods and services that humans 

### 7 enjo y from ecosystems. These provide a basis for three higher

- level categories 

### 8

of services. 

### 9

 Provisioning services, such as products ( Gitay et al., 2001 ) , i.e., food 

### 10 (including game, roots, seeds, nuts and other fruit, spices, fodder), water, fiber 

### 11 (including wood, textiles), and medicinal and cosmetic products (such as 

### 12 aromatic plants, pigments). 

### 13

 Regulating services that are of paramount importance for h uman society such 

### 14
as (1) C sequestration, (2) climate and water regulation, (3) protection from 

### 15
natural hazards such as floods, avalanches, or rock

- fall, (4) water and air 

### 16 purification, and (5) disease and pest regulation. 

### 17

 Cultural services that satisfy h uman spiritual and aesthetic appreciation of 

### 18 ecosystems and their components including recreational and other nonmaterial 

### 19

benefits. 

### 20

In the sections that follow, available information on individual, population and 

### 21 community response to O 3 will be discussed. Effects of O 3 on productivity and 

### 22

C sequestration, water cycling, below

- ground processes, competition and biodiversity, 

### 23 and insects and wildlife are considered below and in the context of ecosystem services 

### 24 where appropriate. 

### 25

9.4.2 Visible Foliar Injury and Bi omonitoring

Visible foliar injury resulting from exposure to O 3 has been well characterized and 

### 26 documented over several decades on many tree, shrub, herbaceous, and crop species 

### 27
( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996b

, 1984

, 1978a ) . Visible foliar injury symptoms are considered 

### 28 diagnostic as they have been verifie d experimentally in exposure

- response studies, using 

### 29 exposure methodologies such as CSTRs, OTCs, and free

- air fumigation (see Section 9.2 

### 30

for more detail on exposure methodologies). Several pictorial atlases and guides have 

### 31 been published, providing details on diagnosis and identification of O 3 - induced visible 

### 32 foliar injury on many plant species throughout North America ( Flagler, 1998 ; NAPAP, 

### 33

1987 ) and Europe ( Innes et al., 2001 ; Sánchez et al., 2001 ) . Typical visible injury 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 42 June 2012 symptoms on broad

- leaved plants include: stippling, fle cking, surface bleaching, bifacial 

### 1 necrosis, pigmentation (e.g., bronzing), chlorosis, and/or premature senescence. Typical 

### 2 visible injury symptoms for conifers include: chlorotic banding, tip burn, flecking, 

### 3 chlorotic mottling, and/or premature senescence of needles. Although common patterns 

### 4 of injury develop within a species, these foliar lesions can vary considerably between and 

### 5 within taxonomic groups. Furthermore, the degree and extent of visible foliar injury 

### 6 development varies from year to year and s ite to site ( Orendovici

- Best et al., 2008 ; 

### 7 Chappelka et al., 2007 ; Smith et al., 2003 ) , even among co

- members of a population 

### 8 exposed to similar O 3 levels, due to the influence of co

- occurring environmental and 

### 9 genetic factors ( Souza et al., 2006 ; Chappelka et al., 2003 ; Somers et al., 1998 )

. 

### 10
Nevertheless, Chappelka et al. (2007 ) reported that the average incidence of O 3 - induced 

### 11 foliar injury was 73% on milkweed observed in the Great Smoky Mountains National 

### 12 Park in the years 1992

- 1996. 

### 13

Although the majority of O 3 - induced visible foliar injury occurrence has been observed 

### 14 on seedlings and small plants, many studies have reported visible injury of mature 

### 15 coniferous trees, primarily in the w estern U.S. ( Arbaugh et al., 1998 ) an d to mature 

### 16

deciduous trees in eastern North America ( Schaub et al., 2005 ; Vollenweider et al., 2003 ; 

### 17 Chappelka et al., 1999a ; Chappelka et al., 1999b ; Somers et al., 1998 ; Hildebrand et al., 

### 18

1996 )

. 

### 19

It is important to note that visible foliar injury occurs only when sensitive plants are 

### 20 exposed to elevated O 3 concentrations in a predisposing environment. A major modifying 

### 21

factor for O 3 - induced visible foliar injury is the amount of soil moisture available to a 

### 22 plant during the year that the visible foliar injury is being assessed. This is because lack 

### 23 of soil moisture generally decreases stomatal conductance of plants and, therefore, limits 

### 24

the amount of O 3 entering the leaf that can cause injury ( Matyssek et al., 2006 ; Panek, 

### 25

2004 ; Grulke et al., 2003a ; Panek and Goldstein, 2001 ; Temple et al., 1992 ; Temple et 

### 26
al., 1988 ) . Consequently, many studies have shown that dry periods in local areas tend to 

### 27 decrease the incidence and severity of O 3 - induced visible foliar injury; therefore, the 

### 28 incidence of visible foliar injury is not always higher in years and areas with higher O 3 , 

### 29 especially with co

- occurri ng drought ( Smith et al., 2003 ) . Other factors such as leaf age 

### 30 influence the severity of symptom expression with older leaves showing gr eater injury 

### 31 severity as a result of greater seasonal exposure ( Zhang et al., 2010a )

. 

### 32

Although visible injury is a valuable indicator of the presence of phytotoxic 

### 33

concentrations of O 3 in ambient air, it is not always a reliable indicator of other negative 

### 34

effects on vegetation. The significa nce of O 3 injury at the leaf and whole plant levels 

### 35 depends on how much of the total leaf area of the plant has been affected, as well as the 

### 36 plant’s age, size, developmental stage, and degree of functional redundancy among the 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 43 June 2012 existing leaf area. Previous O 3 AQCDs have noted the difficulty in relating visible foliar 

### 1 injury symptoms to other vegetation effects such as individual plant growth, stand 

### 2 growth, or ecosystem characteristics ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996b ) . As a r esult, it is not 

### 3 presently possible to determine, with consistency across species and environments, what 

### 4 degree of injury at the leaf level has significa nce to the vigor of the whole plant. 

### 5 However, in some cases, visible foliar symptoms have been correlat ed with decreased 

### 6 vegetative growth ( Som ers et al., 1998 ; Karnosky et al., 1996 ; Peterson et al., 1987 ; 

### 7
Benoit et al., 1982 ) and with impaired reproductive function ( Chappelka, 2002 ; Black et 

### 8
al., 2000 ) . Conversely, the lack of v isible injury does not always indicate a lack of 

### 9 phytotoxic concentrations of O 3 or a lack of non

- visible O 3 effects ( Gregg et al., 2006

, 

### 10

2003 )

. 

### 11

9.4.2.1 Biomonitoring

The use of biological indicators to detect phytotoxic levels of O 3 is a longstanding and 

### 12 effective methodology ( Chappelka and Samuelson, 1998 ; Manning and Krupa, 1992 ) . A 

### 13 plant bioindicator can be defined as a vascular or nonvascular plant exhibiting a typical 

### 14 and verifiable response when exposed to a plant stress such as an air pollutant ( Manning, 

### 15

2003 ) . To be considered a goo d indicator species, plants must (1) exhibit a distinct, 

### 16 verified response; (2) have few or no confounding disease or pest problems; and (3) 

### 17 exhibit genetic stability ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Such sensitive plants can be used to detect 

### 18 the presence of a specific air pollutant such as O 3 in the ambient air at a specific loc ation 

### 19 or region and, as a result of the magnitude of their response, provide unique information 

### 20 regarding specific ambient air quality. Bioindicators can be either introduced sentinels, 

### 21 such as the widely used tobacco ( Nicotiana tabacum ) variety Bel W3 ( Calatayud et al., 

### 22

2007b ; Laffray et al., 2007 ; Nali et al., 2007 ; Gombert et al., 2006 ; Kostka

- Rick and 

### 23
Hahn, 2005 ; Heggestad, 1991 ) or detectors, which are sensitive native plant species 

### 24
( Chappelka et al., 2007 ; Souza et al., 2006 ) . The approach is especially useful in areas 

### 25

where O 3 monitors are not operated ( Manning, 2003 ) . For example, in remote wilderness 

### 26 areas where instrument monitoring is generally not available, the use of bioindicator 

### 27 surveys in conjunction with the use of passive samplers ( Krupa et al., 2001 ) may be a 

### 28 useful methodology ( Manning, 2003 ) . However, it requires expertise in recognizing those 

### 29 signs and symptoms uniquely attributable to exposure to O 3 as well as in their 

### 30 quantitative assessment. 

### 31

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, new sensitive plant species have been identified from field 

### 32 surveys and verified in controlled exposure studies ( Kline et al., 2009 ; Kline et al., 2008 )

. 

### 33 Several multiple

- year field surveys have also been conducted at National Wildlife 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 44 June 2012 Refuges in Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, and South Carolina ( Davis, 2009

, 2007a

, b ; 

### 1
Davis and Orendovici, 2006 )

. 

### 2

The USDA Forest Service through the Forest Health Monitoring Program (FHM) (1990

- 

### 3 2001) and currently the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program has been collecting 

### 4 data regarding the incidence and severity of visible foliar injury on a variety of O 3 

### 5 sensitive plant species throughout the U.S. ( Coulston et al., 2003 ; Smith et al., 2003 ) . The 

### 6 plots where these data are taken are known as biosites. These biosites are locat ed 

### 7 throughout the country and analysis of visible foliar injury within these sites follows a set 

### 8 of established protocols. For more details, see http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/fia/topics/ozone/ 

### 9
( USDA, 2011 ) . The network has provided evidence of O 3 concentrations high enough to 

### 10 induce visible symptoms on sensitive vegetation. From repeated observations and 

### 11

measurements made over a number o f years, specific patterns of areas experiencing 

### 12

visible O 3 injury symptoms can be identified. ( Coulston et al., 2003 ) used information 

### 13 gathered over a 6

- year period (1994

- 1999) from the network to identify several species 

### 14

that were sensit ive to O 3 over entire regions, including sweetgum ( Liquidambar 

### 15
styraciflua ), loblolly pine ( Pinus taeda ), and black cherry ( P. serotina ). In a study of the 

### 16
west coast of the U.S, Campbell et al. (2007 ) reported O 3 injury in 25

- 37% of biosites in 

### 17 California forested ecosystems from 2000

- 2005. 

### 18

A study by Kohut (2007 ) assessed the estimated risk of O 3 - induced visible foliar injury 

### 19 on bioindicator plants ( NPS, 2006 ) in 244 national parks in support of the National Park 

### 20 Service’s Vital Signs Monitoring Netwo rk ( NPS, 2007 ) . The risk assessment was based 

### 21 on a simple model relating response to the interaction of species, level of O 3 exposure, 

### 22

a nd exposure environment. Kohut (2007 ) concluded that the estimated risk of visible 

### 23 foliar injury was high in 65 parks (27%), moderate in 46 parks (19%), and low in 131 

### 24 parks (54%). Some of the well

- known parks with a high risk of O 3 - induced visible foliar 

### 25 injury include Gettysburg, Valley Forge, Delaware Water Gap, Cape Cod, Fire Island, 

### 26 Antietam, Harpers Ferry, Manassas, Wolf Trap Farm Park, Mammot h Cave, Shiloh, 

### 27 Sleeping Bear Dunes, Great Smoky Mountains, Joshua Tree, Sequoia and Kings Canyon, 

### 28

and Yosemite. 

### 29

Lichens have also long been used as biomonitors of air pollution effects on forest health 

### 30
( Nash , 2008 ) . It has been suspected, based on field surveys in the San Bernardino 

### 31 Mountains surrounding the Los Angeles air basin, that declines in lichen diversity and 

### 32

abundance were correlated with measured O 3 gradients ( Gül et al., 2011 ) . Several recent 

### 33

studies in North America ( Geiser and Neitlich, 2007 ; Gombert et al., 2006 ; Jovan and 

### 34
McCune, 2006 ) and Europe ( Nali et al., 2007 ; Gombert et al., 2006 ) have used lichens as 

### 35

biomonitors of atmos pheric deposition (e.g., N and S) and O 3 exposure. Nali et al. (2 007 ) 

### 36 found that epiphytic lichen biodiversity was not related to O 3 geographical distribution. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 45 June 2012 In addition, a recent study by Riddell et al. ( 2010 ) found that lichen species, Ramalina 

### 1

menziesii , showed no decline in physiological response to low and moderate 

### 2

concentrations of O 3 and may not be a good indicator for O 3 pollution. Mosses have also 

### 3 been used as biomonitors of air pollution; howev er, there remains a knowledge gap in the 

### 4 understanding of the effects of ozone on mosses as there has been very little information 

### 5 available on this topic in recent years. 

### 6

9.4.2.2 Summary

Visible foliar injury resulting from exposure to O 3 has been well characterized and 

### 7 documented over several decades of research on many tree, shrub, herbaceous, and crop 

### 8 species ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996b

, 1984

, 1978a ) . Ozone

- induced visible foliar injury 

### 9 symptoms on certain bioindicator plant species are considered diagnostic as they have 

### 10

been verifie d experimentally in exposure

- response studies, using exposure methodologies 

### 11
such as continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTRs), OTCs, and free

- air fumigation. 

### 12 Experimental evidence has clearly established a consistent association of visible injury 

### 13

with O 3 ex posure, with greater exposure often resulting in greater and more prevalent 

### 14 injury. Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, results of several multi

- year field surveys of 

### 15

O 3 - induced visible foliar injury at National Wildlife Refuges in Maine, Michigan, New 

### 16 Jersey, and Sou th Carolina have been published. New sensitive species showing visible 

### 17 foliar injury continue to be identified from field surveys and verified in controlled 

### 18 exposure studies. 

### 19

The use of biological indicators in field surveys to detect phytotoxic levels of O 3 is a 

### 20 longstanding and effective methodology. The USDA Forest Service through the Forest 

### 21 Health Monitoring (FHM) Program (1990

- 2001) and currently the Forest Inventory and 

### 22 Analysis (FIA) Program has been collecting data regarding the incidence and severi ty of 

### 23 visible foliar injury on a variety of O 3 sensitive plant species throughout the U.S. The 

### 24 network has provided evidence that O 3 concentrations were high enough to induce visible 

### 25 symptoms on sensitive vegetation. From repeated observations and measurem ents made 

### 26 over a number of years, specific patterns of areas experiencing visible O 3 injury 

### 27 symptoms can be identified. As noted in the preceding section, a study of 244 national 

### 28 parks indicated that the estimated risk of visible foliar injury was high in 65 parks (27%), 

### 29 moderate in 46 parks (19%), and low in 131 parks (54%). 

### 30

Evidence is sufficient to conclude that the re is a causal relationship between ambient 

### 31

O 3 exposure and the occurrence of O 3 - induced visible foliar injury on sensitive 

### 32 vegetation acros s the U.S. 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 46 June 2012 9.4.3 Growth, Productivity and Carbon Storage in Natural Ecosystems

Ambient O 3 concentrations have long been known to cause decreases in photosynthetic 

### 1 rates, decreases in growth, and decreases in yield ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996c

, 1986

, 

### 2

1978a ) . The O 3 - induced damages at the plant scale may translate to damages at the stand, 

### 3 then ecosystem scales, and cause changes in productivity and C storage. This section 

### 4 focuses on the responses of C cycling to seasonal or multi

- year exposures to O 3 at levels 

### 5 of organization ranging from individual plants to ecosystems. Quantitative responses 

### 6 include changes in plant growth, plant biomass allocation, ecosystem production and 

### 7 ecosystem C sequestration. Most information av ailable on plant

- scale responses was 

### 8 obtained from studies that used a single species especially tree seedlings and crops, while 

### 9 some used mixtures of herbaceous species. Ecosystem changes are difficult to evaluate in 

### 10 natural settings, due to the complexit y of interactions, the number of potential 

### 11 confounders, and the large spatial and temporal scales. The discussion of ecosystem 

### 12 effects focuses on new studies at the large

- scale FACE experiments and on ecological 

### 13

model simulations. 

### 14

9.4.3.1 Plant Growth and Biomass Allocation

The previous O 3 AQCDs concluded that there is strong evidence that exposure to O 3 

### 15 decreases photosynthesis and growth in numerous plant species ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 

### 16

1996b

, 1984

, 1978a ) . Studies published since the last review support those conclusions 

### 17

and are summarized below. 

### 18

In general, research conducted over several decades has indicated that exposure to O 3 

### 19 alters stomatal conductance and reduces photosynthesis in a wide variety of plant species. 

### 20
In a review of more than 55 studies, Witti g et al. (2007 ) reported that current O 3 

### 21 concentrations in the northern hemisphere are decreasing stomatal conductance (13%) 

### 22 and photosynthesis (11%) across tree species. It was also found that younger trees (<4 

### 23 years) were affected less by O 3 than olde r trees. Further, the authors also found that 

### 24 decreases in photosynthesis are consistent with the cumulative uptake of O 3 into the leaf. 

### 25 In contrast, several studies reported that O 3 exposure may result in loss of stomatal 

### 26 control, incomplete stomatal clos ure at night and a decoupling of photosynthesis and 

### 27 stomatal conductance, which may have implications for whole

- plant water use 

### 28
(Section 9.4.5 ). 

### 29

I n a recently published meta

- analysis, Wittig et al. (2009 ) quantitatively compiled peer 

### 30 reviewed studies from the past 40 years on the effect of current and future O 3 exposures 

### 31 on the physiology and growth of forest species. They found that current ambient O 3 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 47 June 2012 concentrations as reported in those studies significa ntly decreased annual total biomass 

### 1 growth (7%) across 263 studies. The authors calculated the ambient O 3 concentrations 

### 2 across these studies to average 40 ppb. This average was calculated across the duration of 

### 3 each study and there were therefore many hourly exposures well above 40 ppb. The 

### 4 decreased growth effect was reported to be greater (11 to 17%) in elevated O 3 exposures 

### 5
(97 ppb) ( Wittig et al., 2009 ) . This meta

- anal ysis demonstrates the coherence of O 3 

### 6 effects across numerous studies and species that used a variety of experimental 

### 7 techniques, and these results support the conclusion of the previous AQCD that exposure 

### 8

to O 3 decreases plant growth. 

### 9

In two companion pap ers, McLaughlin et al. (2007a ); ( 2007b ) investigated the effects of 

### 10

ambient O 3 on tree growth and hydrology at forest sites in the southern Appalachian 

### 11 Mountains. The authors report ed that the cumulative effects of ambient levels of O 3 

### 12 decreased seasonal stem growth by 30

- 50% for most tree species in a high O 3 year in 

### 13 comparison to a low O 3 year ( McLaughlin et al., 2007a ) . The authors also reported that 

### 14 high ambient O 3 concentrations can disrupt whole

- tree water use and in turn reduce late



### 15

season streamflow ( McLaughlin et al., 2007b ) ; see Section 9.4.5 for more on water 

### 16 cycling. 

### 17

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, several recent studies have reported results from the Aspen 

### 18

FACE “free air” O 3 and CO 2 exposure experiment in Wisconsin ( Darbah et al., 2008 ; 

### 19
Riikonen et al., 2008 ; Darbah et al., 2007 ; Kubiske et al., 2007 ; Kubiske et al., 2006 ; 

### 20 King et al., 2005 ) . At the Aspen FACE site, single

- species and two

- species stands of trees 

### 21 were grown in 12, 30

- m diameter rings corresponding to three replications of a full 

### 22

factorial ar rangement of two levels each of CO 2 and O 3 exposure. Over the first 

### 23

seven years of stand development, Kubiske et al. (2006 ) observed that elevated O 3 

### 24 decreased tree heights, diameters, and main stem volumes in the aspen community by 11, 

### 25 16, and 20%, respectively. In addition, Kubiske et al. (2007 ) reported that elevated O 3 

### 26 may change intra

- and inter

- species competition. For example, O 3 treatments increased 

### 27 the rate of conversion from a mixed aspen

- birch community to a birch dominated 

### 28 community. In a comparison presented in Section 9.6.3 of this document, EPA found that 

### 29 effects on biomass accumulation in aspen during the first seven years closely agreed with 

### 30 the exposure

- respons e function based on data from earlier OTC experiments. 

### 31

Several studies at the Aspen FACE site also considered other growth

- related effects of 

### 32

elevated O 3
. Darbah et al. (2008 ); Darbah et al. (2007 ) reported that O 3 treatments 

### 33 decreased paper birch seed weigh t and seed germination and that this would likely lead to 

### 34 a negative impact of regeneration for that species. Riikonen et al. (2008 ) found that 

### 35

elevated O 3 decreased the amount of starch in birch buds b y 16%, and reduced aspen bud 

### 36 size, which may have been related to the observed delay in spring leaf development. The 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 4 8 June 2012 results suggest that elevated O 3 concentrations have the potential to alter C metabolism of 

### 1 overwintering buds, which may have carry

- over e ffects in the subsequent growing season 

### 2
( Riikonen et al., 2008 )

. 

### 3

Effects on growth of understory vegetation were also investigated at Aspen FACE. 

### 4
Bandeff et al. (2006 ) found that the effects of elevated CO 2 and O 3 on understory species 

### 5 composition, total and individual specie s biomass, N content, and 15 N recovery were a 

### 6 result of overstory community responses to those treatments; however, the lack of 

### 7 apparent direct O 3 treatment e ff ects may have been due to high variability in the data. 

### 8 Total understory biomass increased with i ncreasing light and was greatest under the open 

### 9 canopy of the aspen/maple community, as well as the more open canopy of the elevated 

### 10

O 3 treatments ( Bandeff et al., 2006 ) . Similarly, data from a study by Awmack et al. 

### 11
(2007 ) suggest that elevated CO 2 and O 3 may have indirect growth effects on red 

### 12
( Trifolium pratense ) and white ( Trifolium repens ) clover in the understory via overstory 

### 13 community effects; however, no direct effects of elevated O 3 were observed. 

### 14

Overall, the studies at the Aspen FACE experiment are consistent with many of the OTC 

### 15 studies that were evaluated in previous O 3 AQ CDs demonstrating that O 3 exposure 

### 16 decreases growth in numerous plant species. These results strengthen the understanding 

### 17

of O 3 effects on forests and demonstrate the relevance of the knowledge gained from 

### 18 trees grown in open

- top chamber studies. 

### 19

For some annual species, particularly crops, the relevant measurement for an assessment 

### 20

of the risk of O 3 exposure is yield or growth, e.g., production of grain or biomass. For 

### 21 plants grown in mixtures such as hayfields, and natural or semi

- natural grasslands 

### 22
(incl uding native nonagricultural species), affected factors other than production of 

### 23 biomass may be important. Such endpoints include biodiversity or species composition, 

### 24 and effects on those endpoints may be indirect, resulting, for example, from competitive 

### 25 interactions among plants in mixed

- species communities. Most of the available data on 

### 26

non

- crop herbaceous species are for grasslands, with many of the recent studies 

### 27 conducted in Europe. See Section 9.4.7 for a review of the recent literature on O 3 effects 

### 28 on competition and biodiversity in grasslands. 

### 29

Root growth

Although O 3 does not penetrate soil, it could alter root development by decreasing 

### 30

C assimilation via photosynthesis leading to less C allocation to the roots ( Andersen, 

### 31

2003 ) . The response of root development to O 3 exposure depends on available 

### 32 photosynthate within the plant and could vary over time. Many biotic and abiotic factors, 

### 33 such as community dynamics and drought stress, have been found to alter root 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 49 June 2012 development under eleva ted O 3 . Generally, there is clear evidence that O 3 reduces C 

### 1
allocation to roots; however, results of a few recent individual studies have shown 

### 2 negative ( Jones et al., 2010 ) , non

- significa nt ( Andersen et al., 2010 ; Phillips et al., 2009 ) 

### 3 and positive effects ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Grebenc and Kraigher, 2007 ) on root biomass 

### 4

and root: shoot ratio. 

### 5

An earlier study at the Aspen FACE experiment found that elevated O 3 reduced coarse 

### 6 root and fine roots biomass in young stands of paper birch and trembling aspen ( King et 

### 7
al., 2001 ) . However, this reduction disappeared several years later. Ozone significa ntly 

### 8

increased fine

- root (<1.0 mm) in the aspen community ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ) . This 

### 9 increase in fine root production was due to changes in community composition, such as 

### 10

better survival of the O 3 - tolerant aspen genotype, birch, and maple, rather than changes in 

### 11

C allocation at the individual tree level ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Zak et al., 2007 ) . In an 

### 12 adult European beech/Norway spruce forest in Germany, drought was found to nullify the 

### 13

O 3 - driven stimulation of fine root growth. Ozone stimulated fine

- root production of 

### 14 beech during the humid year, but had no significa nt impact on fine root production in the 

### 15 dry year ( Matyssek et al., 2010 ; Nikolova et al., 2010 )

. 

### 16

Using a non

- destructive method, Vollsnes et al. (2010 ) studied the in vivo root 

### 17 development of subterranean clover ( Trifolium subterraneum ) before, during and after 

### 18

short

- term O 3 exposure. It was found that O 3 reduced root tip formation, root elongation, 

### 19 the total root length, and the ratios between below

- and above

- ground growth within 

### 20

one week after exposure. Those effects persisted for up to three weeks; however, biomass 

### 21

and biomass ratios were not significa ntly altered at the harvest five weeks after exposure. 

### 22

Several recent meta

- analyses have generally indicated that O 3 reduced C allocated to 

### 23

roots. In one meta

- analysis, Grantz et al. (2006 ) estimated the effect of O 3 on the 

### 24 root:shoot allometric coefficient (k), the ratio between the relative growth rate of the root 

### 25

and shoot. The results showed that O 3 reduced the root:shoot allometric coefficient by 

### 26 5.6%, and the largest decline of the root:shoot allometric coefficient was observed in 

### 27

slow

- growing plants. In another meta

- analysis including 263 publications, Wittig et al. 

### 28
(2009 ) fou nd that current O 3 exposure had no significa nt impacts on root biomass and 

### 29 root:shoot ratio when compared to pre

- industrial O 3 exposure. However, if O 3 

### 30

concentrations rose to 81

- 101 ppb (projected O 3 levels in 2100), both root biomass and 

### 31

root:shoot ratio were found to significa ntly decrease. Gymnosperms and angiosperms 

### 32 differed in their responses, with gymnosperms being less sensitive to elevated O 3 . In two 

### 33

other meta

- analyses, Wang and Taub (2010 ) found elevated O 3 reduced biomass 

### 34 allocation to roots by 8.3% at ambient CO 2 and 6.0% at elevated CO 2 , and Morgan et al. 

### 35
(2003 ) found O 3 reduced root dry weight of soybean. 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 50 June 2012 9.4.3.2 Summary

The previous O 3 AQCDs con cluded that there is strong and consistent evidence that 

### 1

ambient concentrations of O 3 decrease photosynthesis and growth in numerous plant 

### 2 species across the U.S. Studies published since the last review continue to support that 

### 3

conclusion. 

### 4

The meta

- analyse s by Wittig et al. (2009 ); Wittig et al. (2007 ) demonstrate the coherence 

### 5

of O 3 effects on plant p hotosynthesis and growth across numerous studies and species 

### 6 using a variety of experimental techniques. Furthermore, recent meta

- analyses have 

### 7 generally indicated that O 3 reduced C allocation to roots ( Wittig et al., 2009 ; Grantz et 

### 8
al., 2006 ) . Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, several studies were published based on the Aspen 

### 9 FACE experiment using “free air,” O 3 , and CO 2 exposures in a planted forest in 

### 10 Wisconsin. Overall, the studies at the Aspen FACE experiment were consistent with 

### 11 many of the open

- top chamber (OTC) studies that were the foundation of previous O 3 

### 12
NAAQS revie ws. These results strengthen the u nderstanding of O 3 effects on forests and 

### 13 demonstrate the relevance of the knowledge gained from trees grown in open

- top 

### 14

chamber studies. 

### 15

Evidence is sufficient to conclude that there is a causal relationship between ambient 

### 16

O 3 exposure and reduced growth of native woody and herbaceous vegetation

. 

### 17

9.4.3.3 Reproduction

Studies during recent decades have demonstrated O 3 effects on various stages of plant 

### 18 reproduction. The impacts of O 3 on reproductive development, as reviewed b y Black et 

### 19
al. (2000 ) , can occur by influencing (1) age at which flowering occurs, particu larly in 

### 20 long

- lived trees that often have long juvenile periods of early growth without flower and 

### 21 seed production; (2) flower bud initiation and development; (3) pollen germination and 

### 22 pollen tube growth; (4) seed, fruit, or cone yields; and (5) seed qual ity ( Table 9

- 1 ) ( U.S. 

### 23
EPA, 2006b ) . Several recent studies since the 2006 O 3 AQCD further demonstrate the 

### 24

effects of O 3 on reproductive processes in herbaceous and woody plant species. Although 

### 25

there have been doc umented effects of ozone on reproductive processes, a knowledge gap 

### 26 still exists pertaining to the exact mechanism of these responses. 

### 27

Ramo et al. (2007 ) exposed several meadow species to elevated O 3 (40

- 50 ppb) and CO 2 

### 28
(+100 ppm), both individually and combined, over three growing seasons in ground



### 29 planted mesocosms, using OTCs. Elevated O 3 delayed flowering of Campanula 

### 30
rotundifolia and Vicia cracca . Ozone also reduced the overall number of produced 

### 31 flowers and decreased fresh weight of individual Fragaria vesca berries. 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 51 June 2012 Black et al. (2007 ) exposed Brassica campestris to 70 ppb for two days during late 

### 1 vegetative growth or ten days during most of the vegetative phase. The two

- day exposure 

### 2 had no effect on growth or reproductive characteristics, while the 10 day exposure 

### 3 reduced vegetative growth and reproductive site number on the terminal raceme, 

### 4 emphasizing the importance of exposure duration and timing. Matur e seed number and 

### 5 weight per pod were unaffected due to reduced seed abortion, suggesting that, although 

### 6

O 3 affected reproductive processes, indeterminate species such as B. campestris possess 

### 7 enough compensatory flexibility to avoid reduced seed productio n Black et al. (2007 )

. 

### 8

In the determinate species, Plantago major

, Black et al. (2010 ) found that O 3 may have 

### 9 direct effects on reproductive development in populations of differing sensitivity. Only 

### 10 the first flowering spike was exposed to 120 ppb O 3 for 7 hours per day on 9 successive 

### 11 days (corresponding to flower development) while the leaves a nd second spike were 

### 12 exposed to charcoal

- filtered air. Exposure of the first spike to O 3 affected seed number 

### 13 per capsule on both spikes even though spike two was not exposed. The combined seed 

### 14 weight of spikes one and two was increased by 19% in the two r esistant populations, 

### 15 suggesting an overcompensation for injury; whereas, a decrease of 21% was observed in 

### 16 the most sensitive population ( Black et al., 2010 ) . The question remains as to whether 

### 17

these effects are true direct ozone

- induced effects or compensatory resp onses. 

### 18

Studies by Darbah et al. (2008 ); Darbah et al. (2007 ) of paper birch ( Betula papyrifera ) 

### 19 trees at the Aspen FACE site in Rhinelander, WI investigated the ef fects of elevated O 3 

### 20

and/or CO 2 on reproductive fitness. Elevated O 3 increased flowering, but decreased seed 

### 21 weight and germination success rate of seeds from the exposed trees. These results 

### 22 suggest that O 3 can dramatically affect flowering, seed producti on, and seed quality of 

### 23 paper birch, ultimately affecting its reproductive fitness ( Darbah et al., 2008 ; Darbah et 

### 24
al., 2007 )

. 

### 25

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 52 June 2012 Table 9

- 1 Ozone effects on plant reproductive processes

Species Condition Measures References

Apocynum androsaemifolium (spreading dogbane) Flowering time Bergweiler and Manning (1999 )

Buddleia davidii (butterfly bush) Flowering time Findley et al. (1997 )

Rubus cuneifolius (sand blackberry) Pollen germination Chappelka (2002 )

Plantago major (plantain) Pollen tube elongation Stewart (1998 )

Fragaria × ananassa (cultivated strawberry) Fruit yield Drogoudi and Ashmore (2001 ) ; Drogoudi and Ashmore (2000 )

Plantago major (plantai n) Seed yield Lyons and Barnes (1998 ) ; Pearson et al. (1996 ) ; Reiling and Davison (1992 ) ; Whitfield et al. (1997 )

Understory herbs Seed yield Harward an d Treshow (1975 )

Source: Derived from Table AX9

- 22 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD.



### 9.4.3.4 Ecosystem Productivity and Carbon Sequestration

During the previous NAAQS review, there were limited studies that investigated the 

### 1

effect of O 3 exposure on ecosystem productivity and C sequestration. Recent studies from 

### 2 long

- term FACE experiments provide more evidence of the association of O 3 exposure 

### 3 and changes in productivity at the ecosystem level of organization. In addition to 

### 4 experimental studies, model studies also assessed the impact of O 3 exposure on 

### 5 productivity and C sequestration from stand to global scales. 

### 6

In this section productivity of ecosystems is expressed in different ways depending on the 

### 7 model or the measurements of a study . The most common metric of productivity is Gross 

### 8 Primary Productivity. Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) is total carbon that enters the 

### 9 ecosystem through photosynthesis by plants. Plants return a larger portion of this carbon 

### 10 back to the atmosphere throug h respiration from roots and aboveground portions of plants 

### 11
(R plant ). Net primary production (NPP) is the difference between total carbon gain (GPP) 

### 12 and carbon loss through R plant . Net ecosystem productivity (NEP) is the difference 

### 13

between NPP and carbon l oss through heterotrophic respiration (R het ) (mostly 

### 14 decomposition of dead organic matter) ( Lambers et al., 199 8 ) . Similarly net ecosystem 

### 15 exchange (NEE) is the net flux of carbon between the land and the atmosphere, typically 

### 16 measured using eddy covariance techniques. Positive values of NEE usually refer to 

### 17 carbon released to the atmosphere (i.e., a source), and negative values refer to carbon 

### 18 uptake (i.e., a sink). Other studies have calculated net carbon exchange (NCE). NCE is 

### 19

defined as NPP minus R het , E c (the carbon emission during the conversion of natural 

### 20 ecosystems to agriculture) and E p (the sum of car bon emission from the decomposition of 

### 21

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 53 June 2012 agricultural products). For natural vegetation, E
c and E p are equal to 0, so NCE is equal 

### 1

NEP ( Felzer et al., 2005 ) . In general, modeling studies take into account the effect of O 3 

### 2

on C fixation of a system and there is generally not an e ffect on R plant , R het , E c or E p . 

### 3 Therefore, decreases in GPP, NPP, NEP, NEE and NCE indicate a general decrease in 

### 4 productivity of an ecosystem. 

### 5

Two types of models are most often used to study the ecological consequences of O 3 

### 6 exposure: (1) single plant g rowth models such as TREGRO and PnET

– II ( Hogsett et al., 

### 7

2008 ; Martin et al., 2001 ; Ollinger et al., 1997b ) , and (2) process

- based ecosystem 

### 8

models such as PnET

- CN, Dynamic Land Ecosystem Model (DLEM), Terrestrial 

### 9 Ecosystem Model (TEM), or Met Office Surface Exchange Scheme

- Top

- down 

### 10 Representation of Interactive Foliag e and Flora Including Dynamics (MOSES

- TRIFFID) 

### 11
( Felzer et al., 2009 ; Ren et al., 2007b ; Sitch et al., 2007 ; Ollinger et al., 2002 ) 

### 12
( Table 9

- 2 ). In these models, carbon uptake is simulated through photosynthesis 

### 13
(TREGRO, PnET

– II, PnET

- CN, DLEM and MOSES

- TRIFFID) or gross primary 

### 14 production (TEM). Photosynthesis rate at leaf leve l is modeled by a function of stomatal 

### 15 conductance and other parameters in TREGRO, PnET

– II, PnET

- CN, DLEM and 

### 16

MOSES

- TRIFFID. Photosynthesis at canopy level is calculated by summing either 

### 17 photosynthesis of different leaf types (TREGRO, DLEM, and MOSES

- TR IFFID) or 

### 18 photosynthesis of different canopy layers (PnET

– II, PnET

- CN). The detrimental effect 

### 19

of O 3 on plant growth is often simulated by multiplying photosynthesis rate by a 

### 20 coefficient that is dependent on stomatal conductance and cumulative O 3 uptake 

### 21
( Table 9

- 2 ). Different plant functional groups (PFTs, such as deciduous trees, coniferous 

### 22 trees or crops) show different responses to O 3 exposure. PnE T

- iI, PnET

- CN, TEM, 

### 23

DLEM and MOSES

- TRIFFID estimate this difference by modifying net photosynthesis 

### 24 with coefficients that represent the O 3 induced fractional reduction of photosynthesis for 

### 25 each functional group. The coefficients used in PnET

- iI, PnET

- CN, TEM, DLEM are 

### 26

derived from the functions of O 3 exposure (AOT40) versus photosynthesis reduction 

### 27

from Reich (1987 ) and Tjoelker et al. (1995 ) . The coefficients used in MOSES

- TRIFFID 

### 28

are derived from the O 3 dose

- photosynthesis response function from Pleijel et al. (2004a ) 

### 29

and Karlsson et al. (2004 ) , where O 3 dose is estimated by a metric named CUOt 

### 30 (cumulative stomatal uptake of O 3 ). The O 3 threshold of CUOt is 1.6 nmol/m 2 /sec for 

### 31 woody PFT and 5 nmol/m 2 /sec for grass PFT, and is different from AOT40, which has an 

### 32

O 3 threshold level of 40 ppb for all PFTs. Experimental and model studies on ecosystem 

### 33 productivity and C sequestration at the forest stand scale as well as regional and global 

### 34 scales are reviewed in the following section. 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 54 June 2012 Table 9

- 2 Comparison of models used to simulate the ecological consequences of ozone exposure.

Model Model feature Carbon uptake Ozone effect Reference

TREGRO Hourly or daily step, single plant model simulating vegetation growth
process Leaf: leaf photosynthesis is a function of stomatal conductance, mesophyll conductance and the gradient of CO 2 from atmosphere to the mesophyll cells Canopy: Leaf is divided into different ages. The canopy photosynthesis rate is the sum of the photosynthesis of all foliage groups The effect of O 3 on photosynthesis is simulated by reducing mesophyll conductance, and increasing respiration. The degree of O 3 damage is determined by ambient O 3 exposure, and the threshold O 3 concentration below which O 3 does not affect mesophyll conductance and respiration Hogsett et al. (2008 ) ; Weinstein et al. (2005 ) ; Tingey e t al. (2004 )

PnET

- iI and PnET

- CN PnET

- iI: Monthly time

- step, single plant model

PnET

– CN: Monthly time

- step, ecosystem model Leaf: Maximum photosynthesis rate is determined by a function of foliar N concentration, and stomatal conductance is determin ed by a function of the actual rate of the photosynthesis. Canopy: canopy is divided into multiple, even

mass layers and photosynthesis is simulated by a multilayered canopy submodel The effect of O 3 on photosynthesis is simulated by an equation of stomata l conductance and O 3 dose (AOT40). The model assumes that photosynthesis and stomatal conductance remain coupled under O 3 exposure, with a reduction in photosynthesis for a given month causing a proportion reduction in stomatal conductance. Ollinger et al. (2002 ); Ollinger et al. (1997b ) ; Pan et al. (2009 )

TEM Monthly time

- step, ecosystem model Ecosystem: TEM is run at a 0.5*0.5 degree resolution. Each grid cell is classified by vegetation type and soil texture, and vegetation and detritus are assumed to distribute homogeneously within grid cells. Carbon flows into ecosystem via gross primary production, which is a function of maximum rate of assimilation, photosynthetically active radiation, the leaf area relative to the maximum annual leaf area, mean monthly air temperate, and nitrogen avai lability. The direct O 3 reduction on GPP is simulated by multiplying GPP by f(O 3 )t, where f(O 3 )t is determined by evapotranspiration, mean stomatal conductance, ambient AOT40, and empirically O 3 response coefficient derived from previous publications. Felzer et al. (2005 ); ( 2004 )

DLEM Daily time

- step ecosystem model Leaf: photosy nthesis is a function of 6 parameters: photosynthetic photon flux density, stomatal conductance, daytime temperature, the atmospheric CO 2 concentration, the leaf N content and the length of daytime. Canopy: Photosynthetic rates for sunlit leaf and shaded l eaf scale up to the canopy level by multiplying the estimated leaf area index Ecosystem: GPP is the sum of gross C fixation of different plant function groups The detrimental effect of O 3 is simulated by multiplying the rate of photosynthesis by O 3 eff, whe re O 3 eff is a function of stomatal conductance, ambient AOT40, and O 3 sensitive coefficient. Ozone’s indirect effect on stomatal conductance is also simulated, with a reduction in photosynthesis for a given month causing a reduction in stomatal conductance, and therefore canopy conductance. Ren et al. (2007b ); ( Ren et al., 2007a ) ; Zhang et al. ( 2007a )

MOSES

TRIFFID 30 minute time

- step, dynamic global vegetation model Leaf: photosynthesis is a function of environmental and leaf parameters and stomatal conductance; Stomatal conductance is a function of the concentration of CO 2 and H 2 O in air at the leaf surface and the current rate of photosynthesis of the leaf Canopy: Photosynthetic rates scale up to the canopy level by multiplying a function of leaf area index and PAR extinction coefficient Ecosystem: GPP is the sum of gross C fixation of diff erent plant function groups The effect of O 3 is simulated by multiplying the rate of photosynthesis by F, where F depends upon stomatal conductance, O 3 exposure, a critical threshold for O 3 damage, and O 3 sensitive coefficient (functional type dependent) Sitch et al. (2007 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 55 June 2012 Local scale

Both experimental and modeling studies have provided new information on effects of O 3 

### 1 exposure at the stand or site level, i.e., at the local scale. The above

- and below

- ground 

### 2 biomass and net primary production (NPP) were measured at the Aspen FACE site after 7 

### 3 years of O 3 exposure. Elevated O 3 caused 23, 13 and 14% reductions in total biomass 

### 4 relative to the control in the aspen, aspen

– birch and aspen

– maple com munities, 

### 5 respectively ( King et al., 2005 ) . At the Kranzberg Forest FACE experiment in Germany, 

### 6

O 3 reduced annual volume growth by 9.5 m 3 /ha in a mixed mature stand of Norway 

### 7 spruce and European beech ( Pretzsch et al., 2010 ) . At the grassland FACE experiment at 

### 8 Alp Flix, Switzerland, O 3 reduced the seasonal mean rates of ecosystem respiration and 

### 9 GPP by 8%, but had no significa nt impacts on aboveground dry matter productivity or 

### 10 growing season net ecosystem production (NEP) ( Volk et al., 2011 ) . Ozone also altered 

### 11

C accumulation and turnover in soil, as discussed in Section 9.4.6

. 

### 12

Changes in forest stand productivity under elevated O 3 were assessed by several model 

### 13
studies. TREGRO ( Table 9

- 2 ) has been widely used to simulate the effects of O 3 on the 

### 14

gr owth of several species in different regions in the U.S. Hogsett et al. (2008 ) used 

### 15 TREGRO to evaluate the effectiveness of various forms and levels of air quality 

### 16 standards for protecting tree growth in the San Bernardino Mountains of California. They 

### 17

found that O 3 exposures at the Crestl ine site resulted in a mean 20.9% biomass reduction 

### 18 from 1980 to 1985 and 10.3% biomass reduction from 1995 to 2000, compared to the 

### 19 ‘‘background’’ O 3 concentrations (O 3 concentration in Crook County, Oregon). The level 

### 20 of vegetation protection projected was different depending on the air quality scenarios 

### 21 under consideration. Specifically, when air quality was simulated to just meet the 

### 22

California 8

- h average maximum of 70 ppb and the maximum 3 months 12

- h SUM06 of 

### 23

25 ppm

- h, annual growth reductions were limited to 1% or less, while air quality that just 

### 24 met a previous NAAQS (the second highest 1

- h max [125 ppb]) resulted in 6

- 7% annual 

### 25 reduction in growth, resulting in t he least protection relative to background O 3 ( Hogs ett et 

### 26
al., 2008 )

. 

### 27

ZELIG is a forest succession gap model, and has been used to evaluate the dynamics of 

### 28 natural stand succession. Combining TREGRO with ZELIG, Weinstein et al. (2005 ) 

### 29

simulated the effects of diffe rent O 3 levels (0.5, 1.5, 1.75, and 2 times [×] ambient) on the 

### 30 growth and competitive interactions of white fir and ponderosa pine at three sites in 

### 31
California: Lassen National Park, Yosemite National Park, and Crestline. Their results 

### 32 suggested that O 3 h ad little impact on white fir, but greatly reduced the growth of 

### 33 ponderosa pine. If current O 3 concentrations continue over the next century, ambient O 3 

### 34 exposure (SUM06 of 110 ppm

- h) at Crestline was predicted to decrease individual tree 

### 35

C budget by 10% an d decrease ponderosa pine abundance by 16%. Effects at Lassen 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 56 June 2012 National Park and Yosemite National Park sites were found to be smaller because of 

### 1

lower O 3 exposure levels ( Weinstein et al., 2005 )

. 

### 2

To evaluate the influence of interspeci es competition on O 3 effects, the linked TREGRO 

### 3 and ZELIG modeling system was used to predict the effects of O 3 over 100 years on the 

### 4 basal area of species in a Liriodendron tulipifera

- dominated forest in the Great Smoky 

### 5

Mountains National Park ( Weinstein et al., 2001 ) . Ambient O 3 was predicted to decrease 

### 6

indiv idual tree C budget by 28% and reduce the basal area of L. tulipifera by 10%, 

### 7

whereas a 1.5×

- ambient exposure was predicted to cause a 42% decrease in the individual 

### 8

tree C budget and a 30% reduction in basal area. Individual tree C balance for Acer 

### 9

rubrum decreased 14% and 23% under ambient and 1.5×

- ambient exposure, respectively. 

### 10

Prunus serotina was predicted to have less than a 2% decrease in tree C balance in all 

### 11 scenarios, but its basal area was greatly altered by the O 3 effects on the other tree speci es. 

### 12

Basal area of A. rubrum and P. serotina was predicted to increase for some years, but 

### 13 then decrease by up to 30%, depending on the scenario. The effects of O 3 on stand 

### 14 productivity and dynamics were also studied by other tree growth or stand models, su ch 

### 15
as ECOPHYS, INTRASTAND and LINKAGES. ECOPHYS is a functional

- structural 

### 16 tree growth model. The model used the linear relationship between the maximum 

### 17 capacity of carboxylation and O 3 dose to predict the relative effect of O 3 on leaf 

### 18 photosynthesis ( Martin et al., 2001 ) . Simulations with ECOPHYS found that O 3 

### 19 decreased stem dry matter production, stem diameter and leaf dry matter production, 

### 20
induced earlier leaf abscission, and inhibited root growth ( Martin et al., 2001 )

. 

### 21 INTRASTAND is an hourly time step model for forest stand carbon and water budgets. 

### 22 LINKAGES is a monthly time step model simulating forest growth and community 

### 23 dyn amics. Linking INTRASTAND with LINKAGES, Hanson et al. (2005 ) found that a 

### 24

simulated increase in O 3 concentration in 2100 (a mean 20

- ppb increase over the current 

### 25

O 3 concentration) yields a 35 % loss of net ecosystem C exchange (NEE) with respect to 

### 26
the current conditions (174 g C/m 2 /year). 

### 27

Regional and global scales

Since the publication of the 2006 O 3 AQCD, there is additional evidence suggesting that 

### 28

O 3 exposure alters ecosystem productivity and biogeochemical cycling at the regional 

### 29
scale, i.e., at scales ranging from watershed to subcontinental divisions, and at continental 

### 30 and global scales. Most of those studies were conducted by using process

- based 

### 31 ecosystem models ( Table 9

- 2 ) and are briefly reviewed in the following sections. 

### 32

Ollinger et al. (1997a ) simulated the effect of O 3 on hardwood forest productivity of 64 

### 33

hardwood sites in the northeastern U.S. with PnET

- iI ( Table 9

- 2 ). Their simulations 

### 34

indicated that O 3 caused a 3

- 16% reduction in NPP from 1987 to 1992 ( Table 9

- 3 ). The 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 57 June 2012 interactive effects of O 3 , N deposition, elevated CO 2 and land use history on C dynamics 

### 1 were estimated by PnET

- CN ( Table 9

- 2 ) ( Ollinger et al., 2002 ) . The results indicated that 

### 2

O 3 offset the increase in net C exchange caused by elevated CO 2 and N deposition by 

### 3
13% (25.0 g C/m 2 /year) under agriculture site history, and 23% (33.6 g C/m 2 /year) under 

### 4 timber harvest site history. PnET

- CN was also used to assess changes in C sequestration 

### 5

of U.S. Mid

- Atlantic temperate forest. Pan et al. (2009 ) designed a factorial modeling 

### 6 experiment to separate the effects of changes in atmospheric composition, historical 

### 7 climatic variability and land

- disturbances on the C cycle. They found that O 3 acted as a 

### 8 negative factor, partially offsetting the growth stimulation caused by elevated CO 2 and 

### 9

N deposition in U.S. Mid

- Atlantic temperate forest. Ozone decreased NPP of most forest 

### 10 types by 7

- 8% . Among all the forest types, spruce

- fir forest was most resistant to O 3 

### 11 damage, and NPP decreased by only 1% ( Pan et al., 2009 )

. 

### 12

Felzer et al. (20 04 ) developed TEM 4.3 ( Table 9

- 2 ) to simulate the effects of O 3 on plant 

### 13 growth and estimated effects of O 3 on NPP and C sequestration of deciduous trees, 

### 14 conifers and crops in the conterminous U.S. The results indicated that O 3 reduced NPP 

### 15

and C sequestration in the U.S. ( Table 9

- 3 ) with the large st decreases (over 13% in some 

### 16 locations) in NPP occurring in the Midwest agricultural lands during the mid

- summer. 

### 17 TEM was also used to evaluate the magnitude of O 3 damage at the global scale 

### 18
( Table 9

- 3 ) ( Felzer et al., 2005 ) . Simulations for the period 1860 to 1995 show that the 

### 19 largest reductions in NPP and net C exchange occurred in the mid western U.S., eastern 

### 20 Europe, and eastern China ( Felzer et al., 2005 ) . DLEM ( Table 9

- 2 ) was developed to 

### 21

simulate the detrimental effect of O 3 on ecosystems, and has been used to examine the O 3 

### 22 damage on NPP and C sequestration in Great Smoky Mountai ns National Park ( Zhang et 

### 23
al., 2007a ) , grassland ecosystems and terrestrial ecosystems in China ( Ren et al., 2007b ; 

### 24
Ren et al., 2007a ) . Results of those simulations are listed in Table 9

- 3

. 

### 25

Instead of using AOT40 as their O 3 exposure metric as PnET, TEM and DLEM did, Sitch 

### 26
et al. (2007 ) incorporated a different O 3 m etric named CUOt (cumulative stomatal uptake 

### 27

of O 3 ), derived from Pleijel et al. (2004a ) , into the MOSES

- TRIFFID coupled model 

### 28
( Table 9

- 2 ). In the CUOt metric, the fractional reduction of plant production is dependent 

### 29

on O 3 uptake by stomata over a critical threshold for damag e with this threshold level 

### 30 varying by plant functional type. Consistent with previous studies, their model simulation 

### 31

indicated that O 3 reduced global gross primary production (GPP), C

- exchange rate and 

### 32

C sequestration ( Table 9

- 3 ). The largest reductions in GPP and land

- C storage were 

### 33 projected over North America, Europe, China and India. In the model, reduced ecosystem 

### 34

C uptake due to O 3 damage result s in additional CO 2 accumulation in the atmosphere and 

### 35 an indirect radiative forcing of climate change. Their simulations indicated that the 

### 36 indirect radiative forcing caused by O 3 (0.62

- 1.09 W/m 2 ) could have even greater impact 

### 37 on global warming than the direct radiative forcing of O 3 (0.89 W/m 2 ) ( Sitch et al., 2007 )

. 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 58 June 2012 Results from the various model studies presented in Table 9

- 3 are difficult to compare 

### 1 because of the various spatial and temporal scales used. However, all the studies showed 

### 2

that O 3 exposure decreased ecosystem productivity and C sequestration. These results are 

### 3

consistent and coherent with experimental results obtained from studies at the leaf, plant 

### 4 and ecosystem scales ( Sitch et al., 2007 ; Felzer et al., 2005 ) . Many of the models use the 

### 5 same underlying function to simulate the effec t of O 3 exposure to C uptake. For example 

### 6

the functions of O 3 exposure (AOT40) versus photosynthesis reduction for PnET

- iI, 

### 7

PnET

- CN, TEM, DLEM were all from Reich (1987 ) and Tjoelker et al. (1995 )

. 

### 8 Therefore, it is not surprising that the results are similar. While these models can be 

### 9 improved and more evaluation with experimental data can be done, these models 

### 10 represent the state of the science for estimating the effect of O 3 exposure on productivity 

### 11

and C sequestration. 

### 12

9.4.3.5 Summary

During the previous NAAQS reviews, there were very few studies that investigated the 

### 13

effect of O 3 exposure on ecosystem p roductivity and C sequestration. Recent studies from 

### 14 long

- term FACE experiments, such as Aspen FACE, SoyFACE and the Kranzberg Forest 

### 15 (Germany), provide evidence of the association of O 3 exposure and reduced productivity 

### 16 at the ecosystem level of organizat ion. Studies at the leaf and plant scales show that O 3 

### 17 decreased photosynthesis and plant growth, which provides coherence and biological 

### 18 plausibility for the decrease in ecosystem productivity. Results across different ecosystem 

### 19
models, such as TREGRO, Pn ET, TEM and DLEM, are consistent with the FACE 

### 20 experimental evidence, which show that O 3 reduced productivity of various ecosystems. 

### 21 Productivity is measured by various metrics such as GPP, NPP, NEP , NCE, NEE and 

### 22 individual tree biomass gain. All these me trics indicate a decrease in CO 2 fixation by the 

### 23 systems that were studied. 

### 24

Although O 3 generally causes negative effects on plant growth, the magnitude of the 

### 25 response varies among plant communities. For example, O 3 had little impact on white fir, 

### 26 but gre atly reduced growth of ponderosa pine in southern California ( Weinstein et al., 

### 27

2005 ) . Ozone decreased net primary production (NPP) of most forest types in the Mid



### 28 Atlantic region, but had small impacts on spruce

- fir forest ( Pan et al., 2009 )

. 

### 29

In addition to plant growth, other indicat ors that are typically estimated by model studies 

### 30 include net ecosystem CO 2 exchange (NEE), C sequestration, and crop yield. Model 

### 31 simulations consistently found that O 3 exposure caused negative impacts on these 

### 32 indicators, but the severity of these impact s was influenced by multiple interactions of 

### 33 biological and environmental factors. The suppression of ecosystem C sinks results in 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 59 June 2012 more CO 2 accumulation in the atmosphere. Globally, the indirect radiative forcing caused 

### 1 by O 3 exposure through lowering the ecosystem C sink could have an even greater impact 

### 2 on global warming than the direct radiative forcing of O 3 ( Sitch et al., 2007 ) . Ozone 

### 3 could also affect regional C budgets through interacting with multiple factors, such as 

### 4

N deposition, elevated CO 2 and land use history. Model simulations suggested that O 3 

### 5 partially offset the growth stimulation caused by elevated CO 2 and N deposition in both 

### 6

Northeast

- and Mid

- Atlantic

- region forest ecosystems of the U.S. ( Pan et al., 2009 ; 

### 7 Ollinger et al., 2002 )

. 

### 8

The evidence is sufficient to infer that there is a causal relationship between O 3 

### 9
exposure and reduced productivity, and a likely causal relationship between O 3 

### 10
exposure and reduced carbon sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems. 

### 11

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 60 June 2012 Table 9

- 3 Modeled effects of ozone on primary production, C exchange, and C sequestration.

Scale Mo del Index O 3 Impacts Reference

GPP Global MOSES

TRIFFID CUOt a Decreased by 14

- 23% over the period 1901

- 2100 Sitch et al. (2007 )

NPP Global TEM AOT40 Decreased by 0.8% without agricultu ral management and a decrease of 2.9% with optimal agricultural management Felzer et al. (2005 )

U.S. TEM AOT40 Reduced by 2.3% without optimal N fertilization and 7.2% with optimal N fertilization from 1983

- 1993 Felzer et al. (2005 )

U.S. TEM AOT40 Reduced by 2.6

– 6.8% during the late 1980s to early 1990s. Felzer et al. (2004 )

Northeaster n U.S. PnET AOT40 A reduction of 3

- 16% from 1987

- 1992 Ollinger et al. (1997a )

U.S. Mid

Atlantic PnET AOT40 Decreased NPP of most forest types by 7

- 8% Pan et al. (2009 )

China DLEM AOT40 Reduced NPP of grassland in China by 8.5 Tg b C from 1960s to 1990s Ren et al. (2007a )

C exchange Global TEM AOT40 Reduced net C exchange (1950

– 1995) by 0.1 Pg C/yr without agricultural management and 0.3 Pg C/yr with optimal agricultural management Felzer et al. (2005 )

Global MOSES

TRIFFID CUOt Decreased global mean land

– atmosphere C fluxes by 1.3 Pg C/yr and 1.7 Pg C/yr for the ‘high’ and ‘low’ plant O 3 sensitivity models, respectively Sitch et al. (2007 )

C sequestration Global MOSES

TRIFFID CUOt Reduced land

- C storage accumulation by between 143 Pg C/yr and 263 Pg C/yr from 1900

– 2100 Sitch et al. (2007 )

U.S. TEM AOT40 Reduced C sequestration by 18

– 38 Tg C/yr from 1950 to 1995 Felzer et al. (2004 )

GSM National Park DLEM AOT40 Decreased the ecosystem C storage of deciduous forests by 2.5% and pine forest by 1.4% from 1971 to 2001 Zhang et al. (2007a )

China DLEM AOT40 Reduced total C storage by 0.06% in 1960s and 1.6% in 1990s in China’s terrestrial ecosystems Ren et al. (2007b )

China DLEM AOT40 O 3 exposure reduced the net C sink of China’s terrestrial ecosystem by 7% from 1961 to 2005 Tian et al. (2011 )

China DLEM AOT40 Ozone induced net carbon exchange reduction ranged from 0.4

- 43.1% , depending on different forest type Ren et al. (2011 )

a CUOt is defined as the cumulative stomatal uptake of O 3 , using a constant O 3 - uptake rate threshold of t nmol/m 2 /sec

. b Pg equals 1 × 10 15 grams.



### 9.4.4 Crop Yield and Quality in Agricultural Systems

The detrimental effect of O 3 on crop production has been recognized since the 1960s and 

### 1 a large body of research has stemmed from that recognition. Previous O 3 AQCDs have 

### 2 extensively reviewed this body of literature. Table 9

- 4 summarizes recent experimental 

### 3

studies of O 3 effects on agricultural crops, exclusive of growth and yield. Growth and 

### 4 yield results are summarized in Table 9

- 17

. 

### 5

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 61 June 2012 The actual concentration and du ration threshold for O 3 damage varies from species to 

### 1 species and sometimes even among genotypes of the same species ( Guidi et al., 2009 ; 

### 2

Sawada and Kohno , 2009 ; Biswas et al., 2008 ; Ariyaphanphitak et al., 2005 ; Dalstein and 

### 3
Vas, 2005 ; Keutgen et al., 2005 ) . A number of comprehensive reviews and meta

- analyses 

### 4 have recently been published discussing both the current understanding of the 

### 5 quantitative effects of O 3 concentration on a variety of crop species and the potential 

### 6 focus areas for biotechnological improvement to a future growing environment that will 

### 7 include higher O 3 concentrations ( Bender and Weigel, 2011 ; Booker et al., 2009 ; 

### 8 VanDingenen et al., 2009 ; Ainsworth, 2008 ; Feng et al., 2008 ; Hayes et al., 2007 ; Mills 

### 9
et al., 2007 ; Grantz et al., 2006 ; Morgan et al., 2003 ) . Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD ( U.S. 

### 10
EPA, 2006b ) , exposure

- response indices for a variety of crops have been suggested 

### 11
( Mills et al., 2007a ) and many reports have investi gated the effects of O 3 concentration 

### 12 on seed or fruit quality to extend the knowledge base beyond yield quantity. This section 

### 13 will outline the key findings from these papers as well as highlight some of the recent 

### 14 research addressing the endpoints such a s yields and crop quality. 

### 15

This section will also highlight recent literature that focuses on O 3 damage to crops as 

### 16 influenced by other environmental factors. Genetic variability is not the only factor that 

### 17 determines crop response to O 3 damage. Ozone con centration throughout a growing



### 18 season is not homogeneous and other environmental conditions such as elevated CO 2 

### 19 concentrations, drought, cold or nutrient availability may alleviate or exacerbate the 

### 20 oxidative stress response to a given O 3 concentration. 

### 21

9.4.4.1 Yield

It is well known that yield is negatively impacted in many crop species in response to 

### 22 high O 3 concentration. However, the concentrations at which damage is observed vary 

### 23 from species to species. Numerous analyses of experiments conducted in OTCs an d with 

### 24 naturally occurring gradients demonstrate that the effects of O 3 exposure also vary 

### 25 depending on the growth stage of the plant; plants grown for seed or grain are often most 

### 26 sensitive to exposure during the seed or grain

- filling period ( Soja et al., 2000 ; Pleijel et 

### 27
al., 1998 ; Younglove et al., 1994 ; Lee et al., 1988a ) . AX9.5.4.1 o f the 2006 O 3 AQCD 

### 28 summarized many previous studies on crop yield. 

### 29

Field studies and meta

- analyses

The effect of O 3 exposure on U.S. crops remains an important area of research and 

### 30 several studies have been published on this topic since the 2006 O 3 AQCD ( U.S. EPA, 

### 31

2006b ) ( Ta ble 9

- 4 and Table 9

- 17 ). For example, one study with cotton in a crop

- weed 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 62 June 2012 interaction study ( Grantz and Shrestha, 2006 ) utilizing OTCs suggests that 12

- hour 

### 1
average O 3 concentrations of 79.9 ppb decreased cotton biomass by 25% and 12

- hour 

### 2
average O 3 concentration of 122.7 ppb decreased cotton bio mass by 75% compared to 

### 3
charcoal filtered control (12

- h avg: 12.8 ppb). Further, this study suggests that the weed, 

### 4 yellow nutsedge, was less sensitive to increasing O 3 concentration, which would increase 

### 5 weed competition ( Grantz and Shrestha, 2006 ) . In a study of peanuts in North Carolina, 

### 6 near ambient and elevated exposures of O 3 reduced photosynthesis and yield compared to 

### 7 very low O 3 conditions ( Booker et al., 2007 ; Burkey et al., 2007 ) . In another study, 

### 8
Grantz and Vu (2009 ) reported that sugarcane biomass growth significa ntly declined 

### 9

under O 3 exposure. 

### 10

The average yiel d loss reported across a number of meta

- analytic studies have been 

### 11 published recently for soybean ( Morgan et al., 2003 ) , wheat ( Feng et al., 2008b ) , rice 

### 12
( Ainsworth, 2008 ) , semi

- natural vegetation ( Hayes et al., 2007 ) , potato, bean and barley 

### 13
( Feng and Kobayashi, 2009 ) . Meta

- analysis allows for the objective development of a 

### 14 quantitative consensus of the effects of a treatment across a wide body of literature. 

### 15 Further, this technique allows for a com pilation of data across a range of O 3 fumigation 

### 16 techniques, durations and concentrations in order to assemble the existing literature in a 

### 17 meaningful manner. 

### 18

Morgan et al. (2003 ) reported an average seed yield loss for soybean of 24% compared to 

### 19

charcoal filtered air across all O 3 concentrations used in the 53 compiled studies. The 

### 20 decrease in seed yield appeared to be the product of nearly equal decreases (7

- 12%) in 

### 21 seed weight, seed number and pod number. As would be expected, the lowest O 3 

### 22
concentration (30

- 59 ppb) resulted in the smallest yield losses, approximately 8%, while 

### 23 the highest O 3 concentration (80

- 120 ppb ) resulted in the largest yield losses, 

### 24 approximately 35% ( Morgan et al ., 2003 ) . Further, the oil/protein ratio within the 

### 25 soybean seed was altered due to growth at elevated O 3 concentrations, with a decrease in 

### 26

oil content. The studies included in this meta

- analysis all used enclosed fumigation 

### 27 systems or growth chambers which may have altered the coupling of the atmosphere to 

### 28 the lower plant canopy ( McLeod and Long, 1999 ) , although the results of Morgan et al. 

### 29
(2006 )

, Betzelberger et al. (2010 ) , and the comparisons presented in Section 9.6.3 

### 30 strongly suggest that decreases in yiel d between ambient and elevated exposures are not 

### 31 affected by exposure method. Utilizing the Soybean Free Air gas Concentration 

### 32 Enrichment Facility (SoyFACE; www.soyface.illinois.edu ). Morgan et al. (2006 ) 

### 33 reported a 20% seed yield loss due to a 23% increase in average daytime O 3 

### 34
concentration (56

- 69 ppb) within a single soybean cultivar across two growing seasons in 

### 35 Illinois, which lies within the range predicted by the meta

- analysis. A further breakdown 

### 36

of the effects of current O 3 concentrations (AOT40 of 4.7 ppm

- h) on bean seed quality 

### 37
( Phaseolus vulgaris ) has identified that growth at current O 3 concentrations compared to 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 63 June 2012 charcoal

- filtered air raised total lipids, total crude protein and dietary fiber content ( Iriti et 

### 1
al., 2009 ) . An increase in total phenolics was also observed, however the individual 

### 2 phenolic compounds responded differently, with significa nt decreases in anthocyanin 

### 3

content. The seeds from ambient O 3 exposed plants also displayed increased total 

### 4 antioxidant capacity compared to charcoal

- filtered air controls ( Iriti et al., 2009 )

. 

### 5 Betzelberger et al. (2010 ) has recently utilized the SoyFACE facility to compare the 

### 6 impact of elevated O 3 concentrations across 10 soybean cultivars to investigate 

### 7 intraspecif ic variability of the O 3 response to find physiological or biochemical markers 

### 8

for eventual O 3 tolerance breeding efforts ( Betzelberger et al., 2010 ) . They report an 

### 9 average 17% decrease in yield across all 10 cultivars across two growing seasons due to a 

### 10 doubling of ambient O 3 concentrations, with the individual cultivar responses ranging 

### 11

from

- 7% to

- 36%. The exposure

- response functions derived for these 10 current 

### 12 cultivars were similar to the response functions derived from the NCLAN studies 

### 13

conducted in the 1980s ( Heagle, 1989 )

, suggesting there has not been any selection for 

### 14

increased tolerance to O 3 in more recent cultivars. More complete comparisons between 

### 15 yield predictions based on data from cultivars used in NCLAN st udies, and yield data for 

### 16 modern cultivars from SoyFACE are reported in Section 9.6.3 of this document. They 

### 17 confirm that the response of soybean y ield to O 3 exposure has not changed in current 

### 18

cultivars. 

### 19

A meta

- analysis has also been performed on studies investigating the effects of O 3 

### 20

concentrations on wheat ( Feng et al., 2008b ) . Across 23 studies included, elevated O 3 

### 21 concentrations (ranging from a 7

- h daily average of 31

- 200 ppb) decreased grain yield by 

### 22

29%. Winter wheat a nd spring wheat did not differ in their responses; however the 

### 23 response in both varieties to increasing O 3 concentrations resulted in successively larger 

### 24 decreases in yield, from a 20% decrease in 42 ppb to 60% in 153 ppb O 3 . These yield 

### 25 losses were mainly caused by a combination of decreases in individual grain weight 

### 26
(

- 18%), ear number per plant (

- 16%), and grain number per ear (

- 11%). Further, the grain 

### 27 starch concentration decreased by 8% and the grain protein yield decreased by 18% due 

### 28 to growth at ele vated O 3 concentrations as well. However, increases in grain calcium and 

### 29 potassium levels were reported ( Feng et al., 2008b )

. 

### 30

A recent meta

- analysis found that growth at elevated O 3 concentrations negatively 

### 31 impacts nearly every aspect of rice performance as well ( Ainsworth, 2008 ) . While rice is 

### 32 not a major crop in the U.S., it provides a staple food for over half of the global 

### 33 population ( IRRI, 2002 ) and the effects of rising O 3 concentrations on rice yields merit 

### 34 consideration. On average, rice yields decreased 14% in 62 ppb O 3 compared to charcoal



### 35 filtered air. This yield loss was largely driven by a 20% decrease i n grain number 

### 36
( Ainsworth, 2008 )

. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 64 June 2012 Feng and Kobayashi (2009 ) have recently compiled yield data for six major crop species, 

### 1 potato, barley, wheat, rice, bean and soybean and grouped the O 3 treatments used in those 

### 2 studies into three categories: bas eline O 3 concentrations (<26 ppb), current ambient 7

- or 

### 3

12

- h daily O 3 concentrations (31

- 50 ppb), and future ambient 7

- or 12

- h daily O 3 

### 4
concentrations (51

- 75 ppb). Using these categories, they have effectively characterized 

### 5

the effects of current O 3 conc entrations and the effects of future O 3 concentrations 

### 6 compared to baseline O 3 concentrations. At current O 3 concentrations, which ranged from 

### 7

41

- 49 ppb in the studies included, soybean (

- 7.7%), bean (

- 19.0%), barley (

- 8.9%), wheat 

### 8
(

- 9.7%), rice (

- 17.5%) a nd potato (

- 5.3%) all had yield losses compared to the baseline 

### 9

O 3 concentrations (<26 ppb). At future O 3 concentrations, averaging 63 ppb, soybean 

### 10
(

- 21.6%), bean (

- 41.4%), barley (

- 14%), wheat (

- 28%), rice (

- 17.5%) and potato (

- 11.9%) 

### 11

all had significa ntl y larger yield losses compared to the losses at current O 3 

### 12
concentrations (<26 ppb) ( Feng and Kobayashi, 2009 )

. 

### 13

A review of OTC st udies has determined the AOT40 critical level that causes a 5% yield 

### 14 reduction across a variety of agricultural and horticultural species ( Mills et al., 2007a )

. 

### 15 The authors classify the species studied into three groups: sensitive, moderate and 

### 16

toler ant. The sensitive crops, including watermelon, beans, cotton, wheat, turnip, onion, 

### 17 soybean, lettuce, and tomato, respond with a 5% reduction in yield under a 3

- month 

### 18

AOT40 of 6 ppm

- h. Watermelon was the most sensitive with a critical level of 

### 19

1.6 ppm

- h. The moderately sensitive crops, including sugar beet, oilseed rape, potato, 

### 20 tobacco, rice, maize, grape and broccoli, responded with a 5% reduction in yield between 

### 21

8.6 and 20 ppm

- h. The crops classified as tolerant, including strawberry, plum and barley, 

### 22 responded with a 5% yield reduction between 62

- 83.3 ppm

- h ( Mills et al., 2007a )

. 

### 23

Feng and Kobayashi (2009 ) comp ared their exposure

- response results to those published 

### 24 by Mills et al. (2007a ) and found the ranges of yield loss to be similar for soybean, rice 

### 25
and bean. However, Feng and Kobayashi (2009 ) reported smaller yield losses for potato 

### 26 and wheat and larger yield losses for barley compared to the dose

- response functions 

### 27 published by Mills et al. (2007a ) , which they attributed to their more lenient criteria for 

### 28

literature inclusion. 

### 29

While the studies investigating the impact of various O 3 concentrations on yield are 

### 30 important and aid in determining the vulnerability of various crops to a variety of O 3 

### 31 concentrations, there is still uncertainty as to how these crops respond under field 

### 32 conditions with interacting environmental factors such as temperature, soil moisture, CO 2 

### 33 concentration, and soil fertility ( Booker et al., 2009 ) . Further, there appears to be a 

### 34 distinct developmental and genotype depen dent influence on plant sensitivity to O 3 that 

### 35 has yet to be fully investigated across O 3 concentrations in a field setting. The potentially 

### 36 mitigating effect of breeding selection for O 3 resistance has received very little attention 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 65 June 2012 in the published scien tific literature. Anecdotal reports suggest that such selection may 

### 1 have occurred in recent decades for some crops in areas of the country with high ambient 

### 2 exposures. However, the only published literature available is on soybean and these 

### 3

studies indicat e that sensitivity has not changed in cultivars of soybean between the 

### 4

1980s and the 2000s ( Betzelberger et al., 2010 ) . This conclusion for soybeans is 

### 5 confirmed by comparisons presented in Section 9.6.3 of this document. 

### 6

Yield loss at regional and global scales

Because O 3 is heterogeneous in both time and space and O 3 monitoring stations are 

### 7 predominantly near urban areas, the impacts of O 3 on current crop yields at large 

### 8 geographical scales are difficult to estimate. Fishman et a l. (2010 ) have used satellite 

### 9

observations to estimate O 3 concentrations in the contiguous tri

- state area of Iowa, 

### 10

Illinois and Indiana and have combined that information with other measured 

### 11 environmental variables to model the historical impact of O 3 c oncentrations on soybean 

### 12 yield across the 2002

- 2006 growing seasons. When soybean yield across Iowa, Indiana 

### 13 and Illinois was modeled as a function of seasonal temperature, soil moisture and O 3 

### 14
concentrations, O 3 had the largest contribution to the variabi lity in yield for the southern



### 15

most latitudes included in the dataset. Fishman et al. (2010 ) determined that O 3 

### 16

concentrations significa ntly reduced soybean yield by 0.38 to 1.63% for every 

### 17

additional ppb of exposure across the 5 years. This value is consistent with previous 

### 18

chamber studies ( Heagle, 1989 ) and results from SoyFACE ( Morgan et al., 2006 )

. 

### 19 Satellite estimates of tropospheric O 3 conc entrations exist globally ( Fishman et al., 2008 )

, 

### 20 therefore utilizing this historical modeling approach is feasible across a wider 

### 21 geographical area, longer time

- span and perhaps for more crop species. 

### 22

The detrimental effects of O 3 on crop production at regional or global scales were also 

### 23 assessed by several model studies. Two large scale field studies were conducted in the 

### 24 U.S. (NCLAN) and in Europe (European Open Top Chamber Programme, EOTCP) to 

### 25 assess the impact of O 3 on crop pro duction. Ozone exposure

- response regression models 

### 26 derived from the two programs have been widely used to estimate crop yield loss 

### 27
( Avnery et al., 2011a

, b ; VanDingen en et al., 2009 ; Tong and Mauzerall, 2008 ; Wang and 

### 28
Mauzerall, 2004 )

. Those studies found that O 3 generally reduced crop yield and that 

### 29 different crops showed different sensitivity to O 3 pollution ( 

### 30

Table 9

- 5 ). Ozone was calculated to induce a possible 45

- 82 million metric tons loss for 

### 31 wheat globally. Production losses for rice, maize and soybean were on the order of 

### 32

17

- 23 million metric tons globally ( VanDingenen et al., 2009 ) . The largest yield losses 

### 33 occur in high

- production areas exposed to high O 3 concentrations, such the Midwest and 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 66 June 2012 the Mississippi Valley regions in the U.S., Europe, China and India ( VanDingenen et al., 

### 1

2009 ; Tong et al., 2007 )

. 

### 2

9.4.4.2 Crop Quality

In general, it appears that increasing O 3 concentrations above current ambient 

### 3 concentrations can cause species

- dependent biomass losses, decreases in root biomass 

### 4 and nutritive quality, accelerated senescence and shifts in biodiversity. A study conducted 

### 5 with highbush blackberry has demonstrated decreased nutritive quality with increasing O 3 

### 6 concentration despite no change in biomass between charcoal

- filtered control, ambient O 3 

### 7

and 2 × ambient O 3 exposures ( Ditchkoff et al., 2 009 ) . A study conducted with sedge 

### 8 using control (30 ppb), low (55 ppb), medium (80 ppb) and high (105 ppb) O 3 treatments 

### 9

has demonstrated decreased root biomass and accelerated senescence in the medium and 

### 10 high O 3 treatments ( Jones et al., 2010 ) . Alfalfa showed no biomass changes across 

### 11

two years of double ambient O 3 concentrations (AOT40 of 13.9 ppm

- h) using FACE 

### 12 fumig ation ( Maggio et al., 2009 ) . However a modeling study has demonstrated that 84% 

### 13 of the variability in th e relative feed value in high

- yielding alfalfa was due to the 

### 14 variability in mean O 3 concentration from 1998

- 2002 ( Lin et al., 2007 ) . Further, in a 

### 15 managed grassland FACE system, the reduction in total biomass harvest over five years 

### 16
decreased twice as fast in the elevated treatment (AOT40 of 13

- 59 ppm

- h) compared to 

### 17
ambient (AOT40 of 1

- 20.7 ppm

- h). Compared with the ambient control, loss in annual 

### 18 dry matter yield was 23% after 5 year. Further, functional groups were differentially 

### 19 affected, with legumes showing the strongest negative response ( Volk et al., 2006 )

. 

### 20 However, a later study by Stampfli and Fuhrer (2010 ) at the same site suggested that 

### 21
Volk et al. (2006 ) likely overestimat ed the effects of O 3 on yield reduction because the 

### 22 overlapping effects of species dynamics caused by heterogeneous initial conditions and a 

### 23 change in management were not considered by these authors. An OTC study conducted 

### 24

with Trifolium subterraneum expos ed to filtered (<15 ppb), ambient, and 40 ppb above 

### 25

ambient O 3 demonstrated decreases in biomass in the highest O 3 treatment as well as 10

- 

### 26 20% decreased nutritive quality which was mainly attributed to accelerated senescence 

### 27
( Sanz et al., 2005 ) . A study conducted with Eastern gamagrass and big bluestem in OTC s 

### 28 suggested that big bluestem was not sensitive to O 3 , but gamagrass displayed decreased 

### 29 nutritive quality in the 2 × ambient O 3 treatment, due to higher lignin content and 

### 30

decreased N ( Lewis et al., 2006 )

. 

### 31

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 67 June 2012 9.4.4.3 Summary

The detrimental effect of O 3 on crop production has been recognized since the 1960’s and 

### 1 a large body of research has subsequently stemmed from those initial findings. P revious 

### 2

O 3 AQCDs have extensively reviewed this body of literature ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Current 

### 3

O 3 concentrations across the U.S. are high enough to cause yield loss for a variety of 

### 4 agricultural crops including, but not limited to, soybean, wheat, potato, watermelon, 

### 5 beans, turnip, onion, lettuce, and tomato. Continue d increases in O 3 concentration may 

### 6 further decrease yield in these sensitive crops. Despite the well

- documented yield losses 

### 7 due to increasing O 3 concentration, there is still a knowledge gap pertaining to the exact 

### 8

mechanisms of O 3 - induced yield loss. Re search has linked increasing O 3 concentration to 

### 9 decreased photosynthetic rates and accelerated senescence, which are related to yield. 

### 10

New research is beginning to consider the mechanism of damage caused by prolonged, 

### 11

lower O 3 concentration (so

- called chr onic exposure) compared to short, very high O 3 

### 12
concentration (so

- called acute exposure). Both types of O 3 exposure cause damage to 

### 13 agricultural crops, but through very different mechanisms. Historically, most research on 

### 14

the mechanism of O 3 damage used acu te exposure studies. During the last decade, it has 

### 15 become clear that the cellular and biochemical processes involved in the response to 

### 16

acute O 3 exposure are not involved in response to chronic O 3 exposure, even though both 

### 17 cause yield loss in agricultura lly important crops. 

### 18

In addition, recent research has highlighted the effects of O 3 on crop quality. Increasing 

### 19

O 3 concentration decreases nutritive quality of grasses, decreases macro

- and micro



### 20 nutrient concentrations in fruits and vegetable crops, and decreases cotton fiber quality. 

### 21 These areas of research require further investigation to determine mechanisms and 

### 22

e xposure

- response relationships. 

### 23

During the previous NAAQS reviews, there were very few studies that estimated O 3 

### 24 impacts on crop yields at large geographical scales. Recent modeling studies found that 

### 25

O 3 generally reduced crop yield, but the impacts varied across regions and crop species. 

### 26 For example, the largest O 3 - induced crop yield losses occurred in high

- production areas 

### 27 exposed to high O 3 concentrations, such the Midwest and the Mississippi Valley regions 

### 28

of the U.S. ( VanDingenen et al., 2009 ) . Among crop species, the estimated yield loss for 

### 29 wheat and soybean were higher than for rice and maize ( VanDingenen et al., 2009 )

. 

### 30 Using satellite air

- column observations with direct air

- sampling O 3 data, Fishman et al. 

### 31
(2010 ) modeled the yield

- loss due to O 3 over the continuous tri

- state area of Illinois, 

### 32 Iowa and Wisconsin. They determined that O 3 concentrations significa ntly reduced 

### 33 soybean yield, which further reinforces previous results from FACE

- ty pe experiments 

### 34 and OTC experiments. Evidence is sufficient to conclude that there is a causal 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 68 June 2012 relationship between O 3 exposure and reduced yield and quality of agricultural 

### 1

crops. 

### 2

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 69 June 2012 Table 9

- 4 Summary of recent s tudies of ozone effects on crops (exclusive of growth and yield).

Species Facility Location Exposure Duration Ozone Exposure a (Additional treatment) Variable(s) measured Percent (%) change from CF b (% change from ambient) Reference

Alfalfa ( Medicago sativa cv. Beaver)

Growth chambers 1, 2 or 4 days 3 or 5 h/day 85 ppb (Exposure duration) Relative feed value n.s. *high variability
among treatment groups (N/A) Muntifering et al. (2006b )

Bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris I.

cv Borlotto) OTC, ground

planted Curno, Italy 4 months Seasonal AOT40:

CF = 0.5 ppm

- h;

Ambient = 4.6 ppm

- h (N/A) Seed lipid,

Protein content

Fiber content +28.5 (N/A) +7.88 (N/A) +14.54 (N/A) Iriti et al. (2009 )

Big Blue Stem ( Andropogon gerardii )

OTC Alabama, U.S. 4 months 12

- h avg:
CF = 14 ppb;

Ambient = 29 ppb; Elevated = 71 ppb (N/A) Relative feed value n.s. (n.s.) Lewis et al. (2006 )

Brassica napus

Growth chambers Belgium 4 days CF & 176 ppb for 4 h/day (N/A) Glucosinolates −41 (N/A) Gielen et al. (2006 )

Brassica napus cv. Westar

Growth chambers

Finland 17

- 26 days 8

- h avg:
CF & 100 ppb (Bt/non

- Bt; herbivory) VOC emissions −30.7 (N/A); −34 (N/A) Himanen et al. (2009b )

Eastern Gamagrass ( T

ripsacum dactyloides )

OTC Alabama, U.S. 4 months 12

- h avg:
CF = 14 ppb;

Ambient = 29 ppb; Elevated = 71 ppb (N/A) Relative feed value −17 (−12) Lewis et al. (2006 )

Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa )

OTC

Carcaixent Experimental Station, Spain 30 days 12

- h mean:

CF = 10.2 ppb; NF = 30.1 ppb; NF+O 3 = 62.7 ppb (4 cultivars) Lipid peroxidation; Root length +77 (+38)

−22 (−14) Calatayud et al. (2002 )

Peanut ( Arachis hypogaea )

OTC Raleigh, NC; U.S. 3 yr 12

- h avg:
CF = 22 ppb;

Ambient = 46 ppb; Elevated = 75 ppb (CO 2 : 375 ppm; 548 ppm; 730 ppm) Harvest biomass −40 (−10) Booker et al. (2007 )

Poa pratensis

OTC Braunschweig, Germany 3 yr;
4

- 5 weeks

in the spring 8

- h avg:
CF+25 = 21.7 ppb; NF+50 = 73.1 ppb (Competition) Relative feed value N/A (n.s.; −8) Bender et al. (2006 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 70 June 2012 Species Facility Location Exposure Duration Ozone Exposure a (Additional treatment) Variable(s) measured Percent (%) change from CF b (% change from ambient) Reference

Potato ( Solanum tuberosum

cv. Bintje)

OTC

Sweden & Finland 2 yr CF = 10 ppb;

Ambient = 25 ppb); Ambient(+) = (36 ppb); Ambient(++) = (47 ppb) (N/A) [K], [Ca], [Mg], [P], [N] per dry weight of tubers *dose

- response regression, report significa nt positive or negative slope with increasing [O 3 ] [N] [P] [Ca] n.s.; [K] & [Mg] sig + (N/A) Piikki et al. (2007 )

Potato (Solanum tube rosum

cv. Indira)

Climate chambers Germany 8 weeks CF = 10 ppb;

Ambient = 50 ppb; 2× Ambient = 100 ppb (CO 2 : 400 ppm & 700 ppm) Pathogen infestation using percent necrosis +52 (n.s.) Plessl et al. (2007 )

Soybean

OTC Italy 3 yr AOT40:

CF = 0 ppm

- h;

Ambient = 3.4 ppm

- h; Elevated = 9.0 ppm

- h (Well

- watered &
water

- stressed) Daily evapotranspiration −28 (−14) Bou Jaoudé et al. (2008a )

Soybean ( Glycine max cv. 93B15) SoyFACE Urbana, IL; U.S. 3 yr May

- Oct AOT40:

Ambient = 5

- 22 ppm

- h; Elevated = 20

- 43 ppm

- h (CO 2 : 550 ppm ; environmental variability) Photosynthesis in new leaves, N/A (n.s.) Bernacchi et al. (2006 )

Soybean ( Glycine max cv. 93B15) SoyFACE Urbana, IL; U.S. 4 months 8

- h avg:
Ambient = 38.5 ppb; Elevated = 52 ppb (Herbivory) Herbivory defense

- related
genes N/A (N/A) Casteel et al. (2008 )

Soybean ( Glycine max cv. Essex) OTC, ground

planted Raleigh, NC; U.S. 2 yr 12

- h avg:
CF = 21 ppb;

1.5× Ambient = 74 ppb (CO 2 : 370 ppm & 714 ppm) Post

- harvest residue N/A (−15.46) Booker et al. (2005 )

Soybean ( Glycine max cv. Essex) OTCs, 21 L pots Raleigh, NC; U.S. 3 months 12

- h avg:
CF = 18 ppb);

Elevated = 72 ppb) (CO 2 : 367 & 718) Water

- use efficiency n.s. (N/A) Booker et al. (2004b )

Soybean ( Glycine max ) 10 cultivars) SoyFACE Urbana, IL; U.S. 2 yr 8

- h avg (ppb):

Ambient = 46.3 & 37.9; Elevated = 82.5 & 61.3 (Cultivar comparisons) Total antioxidant capacity N/A (+19) Betzelberger et al. (2010 )

Spring Wheat ( Triticum aestivum

cv. Minaret; Satu; Drabant; Dragon)

OTCs Belgium, Finland, & Sweden 7 yr Seasonal AOT40s ranged from:

0 to16 ppm

- h (N/A) Seed protein content; N/A ( Significa nt negative correlation) Piikki et al. (2008b )

1,000

- seed weight regressed across all experiments N/A ( Significa nt negative correlation)

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 71 June 2012 Species Facility Location Exposure Duration Ozone Exposure a (Additional treatment) Variable(s) measured Percent (%) change from CF b (% change from ambient) Reference

Strawberry ( Fragaria x

ananassa Duch. Cv. Korona & Elsanta)

Growth chambers Bonn, Germany 2 months 8

- h avg:
CF = 0 ppb;

Elevated = 78 ppb (N/A) Total leaf area −16 (N/A) Keutgen et al. (2005 )

Sweet Potato

Growth Chambers Bonn, Germany 4 weeks 8

- h avg:
CF = 0 ppb;

Ambient <40 ppb; Elevated = 255 ppb (N/A) Tuber weight −14 (−11.5) Keutgen et al. (2008 )

Tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum )

OTC Valencia, Spain 133 days 8

- mean:
CF = 16.3 ppb; NF = 30.1 ppb; NF(+) = 83.2 ppb (Various cultivars; early & late harvest) Brix degree −7.2 (−3.6) Dalstein and Vas (2005 )

Trifolium repens & Trifolium pretense Aspen FACE
Rhinelander, WI; U.S. 3 months 3

- mo daylight avg:

Ambient = 34.8 ppb; 1.2× Ambient = 42.23 ppb (CO 2 ; 560 ppm) Lignin; Dry

- matter digestibility N/A (+19.3) N/A (−4.2) Muntifering et al. (2006a )

a Ozone exposure in ppb unless otherwise noted.

b CF = Carbon

- filtered air.

NF = Non

- filtered air.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 72 June 2012 Table 9

- 5 Modeled effects of ozone on crop yield loss at regional and global scales

Scale Index O 3 Impacts Reference

Global M7a; M12b; AOT40 Reduced by 7.3% to 12.3% for wheat, 5.4% to 15.6% for soybean, 2.8% to 3.7% for rice, and 2.4% to 4.1% for maize in year 2000. Van Dingenen et al. (2009 )

Global M12b; AOT40 O 3 - induced global yield reductions ranged from 8.5

- 14% for soybean, 3.9

- 15% for wheat, and 2.2

- 5.5% for maize in year 2000. Global crop production losses totaled 79

- 121 million metric tons, worth $11

- 18 billion annually (in U.S. Dollars; 2000). Avnery et al. (2011a )

U.S. M7; M12; AOT40 Reduced by 4.1% to 4.4% for wheat, 7.1% to 17.7% for soybean, 2.6% to 3.2% for rice, and 2.2% to 3.6% for maize in year 2000. Van Dingenen et al. (2009 )

U.S. SUM06 Caused a loss of 53.8 million to 438 million bushels in soybean production, which a ccount for 1.7

– 14.2% of total U.S. soybean production in 2005 Tong et al. (2007 )

East Asia M7; M12 Reduced the yield of wheat, rice and corn by 1

– 9% and soybean by 23

– 27% in China, Japan and South Korea in 1990 Wang and Mauzerall (2004 )

a M7 is defined as 7

- h mean O 3 concentration (ppb).

b M12 is defined as 12

- h mean O 3 concentration (ppb).



### 9.4.5 Water Cycling

Ozone can affect water use in plants and ecosystems through several mechanisms 

### 1 including damage to stomatal functioning and loss of leaf area. Figure 9

- 7 provides a 

### 2 simple illustration of potential effects of O 3 exposure on water cycling. Section 9.3.2 

### 3 reviewed possible mechanisms for effects of O 3 exposure on stomatal functioning. This 

### 4 section on water cycling discusses how this alteration of stomatal functioning may affect 

### 5 water use in leaves, whole plants, a planted forest and watersheds. . 

### 6

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 73 June 2012 Figure 9

- 7 The potential effects of ozone exposure on water cycling.

In the literature, there is not a clear consensus on the nature of leaf

- level stomatal 

### 1 conductance response to O 3 exposure. At the leaf level, O 3 exposure is known to result in 

### 2 stomatal patchi ness ( Paoletti and Grulke, 2005 ; Omasa et al., 1987 ; Ellenson and 

### 3
Amundson, 1982 ) , i.e., the heterogeneous aperture widths of stomata on the leaf surface, 

### 4 and, as a result, the collective response of groups of stomata on leaves and canopies 

### 5 determines larger

- scale responses to O 3
. When measured at steady

- state high light 

### 6
conditions, leaf

- level stomatal conductance is often found to be reduced when exposed to 

### 7

O 3 . For example, a meta

- analysis of 55 studies found that O 3 reduced stomatal 

### 8 conductance by 11% ( Wittig et al., 2007 ) . However, these steady

- state measurements 

### 9 were generally taken at saturating light conditions and steady

- state vapor pressure deficit 

### 10 (VPD). Saturating light and steady

- state VPD conditions are not common in the field 

### 11

since m any parts of the plant canopy are shaded throughout the day. When studied under 

### 12 varying environmental conditions, many studies have reported incomplete stomatal 

### 13

closure with elevated O 3 exposure during the day ( Mills et al., 2009 ; Grulke et al ., 2007b ; 

### 14 Matyssek et al., 1995 ; Wieser and Havranek, 1995 ) or at night ( Grulke et al., 2004 ) . This 

### 15 O 3 exposure

Altered canopy water loss

Soil moisturestem sap flow Decreased stomatal conductance, sluggish stomatal response, canopy leaf area loss

Altered run off

Stream flows

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 74 June 2012 may be due to sluggish stomatal response. Sluggish stomatal response, defined as a delay 

### 1 in stomatal response to changing environmental factors relative to controls ( Paoletti and 

### 2
Grulke, 2010 ) has also been documented by several researchers ( Grulke et al., 2 007c ; 

### 3 Matyssek et al., 1995 ; Pearson and Mansfield, 1993 ; Wallin and Skärby, 1992 ; Lee et al., 

### 4

1990 ; Skarby et al., 1987 ; Keller and Häsler, 1984 ; Reich and Lassoie, 1984 ) . Sluggish 

### 5 stomatal response associated with O 3 exposure suggests an uncoupling of the normally 

### 6 tight relationship between carbon assimilation and stomatal conductance as measured 

### 7 under steady

- state conditions ( Gregg et al., 2006 ; Paoletti and Grulke, 2005 ) . Several tree 

### 8 and ecosystem models, such as TREGRO, PnET and DLEM, rely on this tight 

### 9 relationship to simulate water and carbon dynamics. The O 3 - induced impairment of 

### 10 stomatal control may be more pronounced for plants growing u nder water stress 

### 11
( Wilkinson and Davies, 2010 ; Grulke et al., 2007a ; Paoletti and Grulke, 2005 ; Bonn et 

### 12
al., 2004 ; Kellomaki and Wang, 1997 ; Tjoelker et al., 1995 ; Reich and Lassoie, 1984 )

. 

### 13

Since leaf

- level stomatal regulation is usual ly assessed in a steady state rather than as a 

### 14 dynamic response to changing environmental conditions, steady state measurements 

### 15 cannot detect sluggish stomatal response. Because of sluggish stomatal responses, water 

### 16 loss from plants could be greater or red uced under dynamic environmental conditions 

### 17 over days and months. In situations where stomata fail to close under low light or water 

### 18 stressed conditions, water loss may be greater over time. In other situations, it is possible 

### 19 that slugglish stomata may fa il to completely open in response to environmental stimuli 

### 20

and result in decreased water loss. 

### 21

In addition to the impacts on stomatal performance, O 3 - induced physiological changes, 

### 22

such as reduced leaf area index and accelerated leaf senescence could alter water use 

### 23 efficiency. It is well established from chamber and field studies that O 3 exposure is 

### 24

correlated with lower foliar retention ( Karnosky et al., 2003 ; Topa et al., 2001 ; Pell et al., 

### 25

1999 ; Grulke and Lee, 1997 ; Karnosky et al., 1996 ; Miller et al., 1972 ; Miller et al., 

### 26

1963 ) . However, Lee et al. (2009a ) did not find changes in needle area of ponderosa pine 

### 27 and reported that greater canopy conductance followed by water stress under elevated O 3 

### 28 may have been caused by stomatal dysfunction. At the Aspen FACE experiment, stand



### 29 level water use, as indicated by sap flux per unit ground area, was not significa ntly 

### 30 affected by elevated O 3 despite a 22% decrease in leaf area index and 20% decrease in 

### 31

basal area ( Uddling et al., 2008 ) . The lack of negative effect of elevated O 3 on stand 

### 32 water use may be due to the substantially increased leaf area

- specific hydraulic 

### 33

conductance ( Uddling et al., 2009 ) . The increased leaf area

- specific hydraulic 

### 34 conductance may be caused by the sluggish stomatal response. For examp le, in the pure 

### 35 aspen stands, the stomatal closure response to increasing vapor pressure deficit was less 

### 36

sensitive and mid

- day leaf water potential was more negative under elevated O 3 

### 37 compared to controls. This suggests that O 3 impaired stomatal control o ver transpiration 

### 38
( Uddling et al., 2009 ) . Another potential factor contributing to the unchanged stand

- level 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 75 June 2012 water use included the higher proportion of sun leaves in trees under elevated O 3 

### 1 compared with control trees ( Uddling et al., 2008 )

. 

### 2

Elevated O 3 could also affect evapotranspiration by altering tree crown interception of 

### 3 precipitation. Ozone was shown to change branch architectural parameters, and the 

### 4 effects were species

- dependent at the Aspen FACE experiment ( Rhea et al., 2010 ) . The 

### 5

authors found that there was a significa nt correlation between canopy architecture 

### 6 parameters and stemflow (the flow of intercepted water down the stem of a tree) for birch 

### 7 but not aspen. 

### 8

It is difficult to scale up physiology measurements from leaves to ecosystems. Thus, the 

### 9 current understanding of how stomatal response at the leaf scale is integrated at the scale 

### 10 of whole forest canopies, and therefore how it influences tree and forest stand water use 

### 11 is limited. Field studies by ( McLaughlin et a l., 2007a ; 2007b ) provided valuable insight 

### 12 into the possible consequences of stomatal sluggishness for ecosystem water cycling. 

### 13 McLaughlin et al. (2007a ); ( 2007b ) indicated that O 3 increased water use in a mixed 

### 14

deciduous forest in eastern Tennessee. McLaughlin et al. (2007a ); ( 2007b ) found that O 3 , 

### 15 with daily maximum levels ranging from 69.2 to 82.9 ppb, reduced stem growth by 30

- 

### 16 50% in the high

- O 3 year 2002. The decrease in growth rate was caused in part by 

### 17 amplifica tion of diurnal cycles of water loss and recovery. Peak hourly O 3 exposure 

### 18 increased the rate of water loss through transpiration as indicated by the increased stem 

### 19 sap flow. The authors suggested that a potential mechanism for the increased sap flow 

### 20

could be altered stomatal regulation from O 3 exposure, but this was inferred through sap 

### 21 flow measurements and was not directly measured. The increased canopy water loss 

### 22 resulted in higher water uptake by the trees as reflected in the reduced soil moisture in t he 

### 23 rooting zone. The change in tree water use led to further impacts on the hydrological 

### 24 cycle at the landscape level. Increased water use under high O 3 exposure was reported to 

### 25

reduce late

- season modeled streamflow in three forested watersheds in eastern Tennessee 

### 26
( McLaughlin et al., 2007b )

. 

### 27

Felzer et al. (2009 ) used TEM

- Hydro to assess the interactions of O 3 , climate, elevated 

### 28

CO 2 and N limitation on the hydrological cycle in the eastern U.S. They found that 

### 29

elevated CO 2 decreased evapotra nspiration by 2

- 4% and increased runoff by 3

- 7%, as 

### 30 compared to the effects of climate alone. When O 3 damage and N limitation were 

### 31 included, evapotranspiration was reduced by an additional 4

- 7% and runoff was increased 

### 32 by an additional 6

- 11% ( Felzer et al., 2009 ) . Based upon simulation with INTRAST and 

### 33
LINKAGES, Hanson et al. (2005 ) found that increasing O 3 concentration by 20 ppb 

### 34

above th e current ambient level yields a modest 3% reduction in water use. Those 

### 35 ecological models were generally built on the assumption that O 3 induces stomatal 

### 36 closure and have not incorporated possible stomatal sluggishness due to O 3 exposure. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 76 June 2012 Because of this assumption, results of those models normally found that O 3 reduced water 

### 1

use. 

### 2

9.4.5.1 Summary

Although the evidence was from a limited number of field and modeling studies, findings 

### 3

showed an association between O 3 exposure and alteration of water use and cycling in 

### 4 vegetation, and at the watershed level. There is not a clear consensus on the nature of 

### 5

leaf

- level stomatal conductance response to O 3 exposure. When measured under steady



### 6 state high light conditions, leaf

- level stomatal conductance is often found to b e reduced 

### 7 when plants are exposed to O 3 . However, measurements of stomatal conductance under 

### 8 dynamic light and VPD conditions indicate sluggish responses under elevated O 3 

### 9 exposure, which could potentially lead to increased water loss from vegetation in so me 

### 10 situations. Field studies conducted by McLaughlin et al. (2007a ); ( 2007b ) suggested that 

### 11 peak hourly O 3 exposure increased the rate of water loss from several tree species, and 

### 12

led to a reduction in the late

- season modeled stream flow in three forested watersheds in 

### 13 eastern Tennessee. Sluggish stomatal responses during O 3 exposure was suggested as a 

### 14 possibl e mechanism for increased water loss during peak O 3 exposure. Currently, the 

### 15

O 3 - induced reduction in stomatal aperture is the biological assumption for most process



### 16 based models. Because of this assumption, results of those models normally found that 

### 17

O 3 re duced water loss. For example, Felzer et al. (2009 ) found that O 3 damage and 

### 18

N limitation together reduced evapotranspiration and increased runoff. 

### 19

Although the direction of the response differed among studies, the evidence is sufficient 

### 20

to conclude that there is likely to be a causal relationship between O 3 exposure and 

### 21
the alteration of ecosystem water cycling. 

### 22

9.4.6 Below

- Ground Processes

Above

- ground and below

- ground processes are tightly i nterconnected. Because roots and 

### 23 soil organisms are not exposed directly to O 3 , below

- ground processes are affected by O 3 

### 24 through alterations in the quality and quantity of C supply from photosynthates and 

### 25

litterfall ( Andersen, 2003 ) . Ozone can decrease leaf C uptake by reducing photosynthesis 

### 26
(Section 9.3 ). Ozone c an also increase metabolic costs by stimulating the production of 

### 27 chemical compounds for defense and repair processes, and by increasing the synthesis of 

### 28
antioxidants to neutralize free radicals (see Section 9.3 ), both of which increase the 

### 29

allocation of carbon for above

- ground processes. Therefore, O 3 could significa ntly reduce 

### 30

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 77 June 2012 the amount of C available for allocation to below

- ground by decreasing C uptake while 

### 1 increasing C consumption of above

- ground processes ( Andersen, 2003 )

. 

### 2

Since the 200 6 O 3 AQCD, there is additional evidence for O 3 effects on below

- ground 

### 3 processes. Ozone has been found to alter root growth, soil food web structure, 

### 4 decomposer activities, C turnover, water cycling and nutrient flow ( Figure 9

- 8 ). Ozone 

### 5 effects on root development and root biomass production and soil food web structure are 

### 6

reviewed in Section 9.4.3.1 and Section 9.4.9.2 , respectively. The focus in this section is 

### 7 on the response of litter inp ut, decomposer activities, soil respiration, soil C formation 

### 8 and nutrient cycling. 

### 9

Note: Arrows denote C flux pathways that are affected by ozone. Dashed lines indicate where the impact of ozone is suspected but unknown.

Source: Modified from Andersen (2003 )

.



### Figure 9

- 8 Conceptual diagram showing where ozone alters C, water and nutrient flow in a t ree - soil system, including transfer between biotic and abiotic components below ground that influence soil physical and chemical properties. CO 2 , H 2 O

Litter production and chemistry Allocation of C

CO 2 release

Roots/symbionts CO 2 , H 2 O

Altered stomatal function

Nutrients

Soil foodweb

• Bacteria

• Fungi

• Micro & marco invertebrates

Soil physical & chemical properties Organic matter Root, leaf litter exudation Soil moisture

Run off Altered species competition retention

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 78 June 2012 9.4.6.1 Litter Carbon Chemistry, Litter Nutrient and Their Ecosystem Budgets

Consistent with previous findings, recent stud ies show that, although the responses are 

### 1 often species

- dependent, O 3 tends to alter litter chemistry ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Alterations 

### 2 in chemical parameters, such as changes in C chemistry and nutrient concentrations, were 

### 3
observed in both leaf and root litter ( Table 9

- 6 ). 

### 4

At the Aspen FACE site, several studies investigated litter chemistry changes ( Parsons et 

### 5
al., 2008 ; Johnson and Pr egitzer, 2007 ; Chapman et al., 2005 ; Liu et al., 2005 ) . In both 

### 6 aspen and birch leaf litter, elevated O 3 increased the concentrations of soluble sugars, 

### 7 soluble phenolics and condensed tannins ( Parsons et al., 2008 ; Liu et al., 2005 )

. 

### 8 Compared to other treatments, aspen litter under elevated O 3 had the highest fiber 

### 9
concentration, with the lowest concentration associated with the birch litter under the 

### 10

same conditions ( Parsons et al., 2008 )

. Chapman et al. (2005 ) measured chemical 

### 11 changes in fine root litter and found that elevated O 3 decreased lignin concentration. 

### 12

O 3 - induced chemistry changes were also reported f rom other experimental sites. Results 

### 13 from an OTC study in Finland suggested that elevated O 3 increased the concentration of 

### 14

acid

- soluble lignin, but had no significa nt impact on other chemicals such as total sugars, 

### 15 hemicelluloses, cellulose or total lign in in the litter of silver birch ( Kasurinen et al., 

### 16

2006 ) . Results from the free air canopy O 3 exp osure experiment at Kranzberg Forest 

### 17

showed that O 3 increased starch concentrations but had no impact on cellulose and lignin 

### 18 in beech and spruce leaf litter ( Aneja et al., 2007 ) . The effect of O 3 on three antioxidants 

### 19
(ascorbate, glutathione and α

- tocopherol) in fine roots of beech was also assessed at 

### 20
Kranzberg Forest. The results indicated that O 3 had no significa nt effect on α

- tocopherol 

### 21
and ascorbate concentrations, but decreased glutathione concentrations in fine roots 

### 22
( Haberer et al., 2008 ) . In addition to changing C chemistry, O 3 also altered nutrient 

### 23 concentrations in green leaves and litter ( Table 9

- 6 ). 

### 24

The combined effects of O 3 on biomass productivity and chemistry changes may alter 

### 25

C chemicals and nutrient contents at the canopy or stand level. For example, although O 3 

### 26 had different impacts on their concentrations, annual fluxes of C chemicals (soluble 

### 27 sugar, soluble phenolics, condensed tannins, lipid and hemicelluloses), macro nutrients 

### 28 (N, P, K and S) and micro nutrients (Mg, B, Cu and Zn) to soil were all reduced due to 

### 29 lower litter biomass productivity at Aspen FACE ( Liu et al., 2007 ; Liu et al., 2005 )

. . In a 

### 30

2

- year growth chamber experiment in Germany, N content of a spruce canopy in a mixed 

### 31 culture and Ca content of a beech canopy in a monoculture was increased due to elevated 

### 32

O 3 , although l eaf production was not significa ntly altered by O 3 ( Rodenkirchen et al., 

### 33

2009 )

. 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 79 June 2012 Table 9

- 6 The effect of elevated ozone on leaf/litter nutrient concentrations.

Study Site Species O 3 Concentration Response Reference

Suonenjoki Research Station, Finland Silver birch Ambient: 10

- 60 ppb

Elevated: 2× ambient Decreased the concentration of P, Mn, Zn and B in leaf litter Kasurinen et al. (2006 )

Aspen FACE Aspen and birch Ambient: 50

- 60 ppb

Elevated: 1.5× ambient Decreased the concentrations of P, S, Ca and Zn, but had no impact on the concentrations of N, K, Mg, Mn, B and Cu in leaf litter. Liu et al. (2007 ) a )

Aspen FACE Birch Ambient: 50

- 60 ppb

Elevated: 1.5× ambient Increase N concentration in birch litter Parsons et al. (2008 )

Kranzberg Forest, Germany Beech and
spruce Ambient: 9

- 41 ppb

Elevated: 2× ambient Increased N concentration in beach leaf, but not in spruce needle Kozovits et al. (2005 )

Kranzberg Forest, Germany Beech and
spruce Ambient: 9

- 41 ppb

Elev ated: 2× ambient (1) Had no significa nt effects on spruce needle chemistry; (2) increased Ca concentration in beech leaves in monoculture, but had no impacts on other nutrients Rodenkirchen et al. (2009 )

Salerno, Italy Holm oak Non

- filtered OTC: 29 ppb Filtered OTC: 17ppb O 3 had no significa nt impacts on litter C, N, lignin and cellulose concentrations Baldantoni et al. (2011 )

Kuopio University Research Garden, Finland Red Clover Ambient: 25.7 ppb

Elevated: 1.5× ambient Increased the total phenolic content of leaves and had minor effects on the concentrations of individual phenolic compounds Saviranta et al. (2010 )



### 9.4.6.2 Decomposer Metabolism and Litter Decomposition

The above

- and below

- ground physiological changes caused by O 3 exposure cascade 

### 1 through the ecosystem and affect soil food webs. In the 2006 O 3 AQCD, there were very 

### 2

few studies on the effect of O 3 on the structure and function of soil food webs, except two 

### 3 studies conducted by Larson et al. (2002 ) and Phillips et al. (2002 )

. Since the last O 3 

### 4 AQCD, new studies have provided more information on how O 3 affects the metabolism 

### 5

of soil microbes and soil fauna. 

### 6

Chung et al. (2006 ) found that the activity of the cellulose

- degr ading enz yme 

### 7
1,4

- β

- glucosidase was reduced by 25% under elevated O 3 at Aspen FACE. The decrease 

### 8

in cellulose

- degrading enzymatic activity was associated with the lower cellulose 

### 9 availability under elevated O 3 ( Chung et al., 2006 ) . H owever, a later study at the same 

### 10 site, which was conducted in the 10th year of the experiment, found that O 3 had no 

### 11 impact on cellulolytic activity in soil ( Edwards and Zak, 2011 ) . In a lysimeter study of 

### 12
beech trees ( Fagus sylvatica ) in Germany, soil enzyme activity was found to be 

### 13 suppressed by O 3 exposure ( Esperschutz et al., 2009 ; Pritsch et al., 2009 ) . Except for 

### 14

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 80 June 2012 xylosidase, enzyme activities involved in plant cell wall degradation (cellobiohydrolase, 

### 1

beta

- glucosidase and glucuronidase) were decreased in rhizosphere soil samples under 

### 2

elevated O 3 (2 × ambient level) ( Pritsch et al., 2009 ) . Similarly, Chen et al. (2009 ) found 

### 3

O 3 exposure, with a 3

- month AOT40 of 21

- 44 ppm

- h, decreased the microbial metabolic 

### 4 capability in the rhizosphere and bulk soil of wheat, although the observed reduction in 

### 5

bulk soil was not significa nt. 

### 6

Ozone

- induced change in soil organisms’ activities could affect litter decomposition 

### 7

rates. Results of recent studies indicated that O 3 slightly re duced or had no impacts on 

### 8 litter decomposition ( Liu et al., 2009b ; Parsons et al., 2008 ; Kasurinen et al., 2006 ) 

### 9
( Baldantoni et al., 2011 ) . The responses varied among species, sites and exposure length. 

### 10
Parsons et al. (2008 ) collected litter from aspen and birch seedlings at Aspen FACE site, 

### 11

and conducted a 23

- month field li tter incubation starting in 1999. They found that 

### 12

elevated O 3 had different impacts on the decomposition of aspen and birch litter. Elevated 

### 13

O 3 was found to reduce aspen litter decomposition. However, O 3 accelerated birch litter 

### 14 decomposition under ambient CO 2 , but reduced it under elevated CO 2 ( Parsons et al., 

### 15

2008 )

. Liu et al. (2009b ) conducted another litter decomposition study at Aspen FACE 

### 16 from 2003 to 2006, when stand leaf area index (LAI) reached its maximum. During the 

### 17

935

- day field incubation, elevated O 3 was shown to reduce litter mass loss in the first 

### 18 year, but not in the second year. They suggested that higher initial tannin and phenolic 

### 19

concentrations under elevated O 3 reduced microbial activity in the first year ( Liu et al., 

### 20

2009b ) . In an OTC experiment, Kasurinen et al. (2006 ) collected silver birch leaf litter 

### 21 from three consecutive growing seasons and conducted three separate litter

- bag 

### 22 incubation experiments. Litter decomposition was not affected by O 3 exposure in the first 

### 23
two incubations, but a slower deco mposition rate was found in the third incubation. Their 

### 24 principle component analysis indicated that the litter chemistry changes caused by O 3 

### 25 (decreased Mn, P, B and increased C:N) might be partially responsible for the decreased 

### 26

mass loss of their third i ncubation. In another OTC experiment, Baldanton i et al. (2011 ) 

### 27

found that O 3 significa ntly reduced leaf litter decomposition of Quercus ilex L, although 

### 28 litter C, N, lignin and cellulose concentrations were not altered by O 3 exposure. 

### 29

9.4.6.3 Soil Respiration and Carbon F ormation

Ozone could reduce the ava ilability of photosynthates for export to roots, and thus, 

### 30 indirectly increase root mortality and turnover rates. Ozone has also been shown to 

### 31

reduce above

- ground litter productivity and alter litter chemistry, which would affect the 

### 32 quality and quantity o f the C supply to soil organisms (Section 9.4.6.1 ). The complex 

### 33 interactions among those changes make it difficult to predict the response of soil 

### 34

C cycling under elevated O 3 . The 2006 O 3 AQCD concluded that O 3 had no consistent 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 81 June 2012 impact on soil respiration ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Ozone could increase or decrease soil 

### 1 respiration, depending on the approach and timing of the measurements. Ozone may also 

### 2

alter soil C formation. However, very few experiments directly mea sured changes in soil 

### 3 organic matter content under O 3 fumigation ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Recent studies on soil 

### 4 respiration and soil C content also found mixed responses. Most importantly, recent 

### 5 results from long

- term fumigation experiments, such as the Aspen FACE experiment, 

### 6 suggest that ecosystem response to O 3 exposur e can change over time. Observations 

### 7 made during the late exposure years can be inconsistent with those during the early years, 

### 8 highlighting the need for caution when assessing O 3 effects based on short

- term studies 

### 9
( Table 9

- 7 ). 

### 10

Table 9

- 7 The temporal variation of ecosystem responses to ozone exposure at Aspen FACE site

Endpoint Period of Measurement Response Reference

Litter decomposition 1999

- 2001 O 3 reduced aspen litter decomposition. However, O 3 accelerated birch litter decomposition under ambient CO 2 , but reduced it under elevated CO 2 Parsons et al. (2008 )

2003

- 2006 O 3 reduced litter mass loss in the first year, but not in the second year. Liu et al. (2009b )

Fine root production 1999 O 3 had no significa nt impact on fine root biomass King et al. (2001 )

2002, 2005 O 3 incr eased fine root biomass Pregitzer et al. (2008 )

Soil respiration 1998

- 1999 Soil respiration under +CO 2 +O 3 treatment was lower than that under +CO 2 treatment King et al. (2001 )

2003

- 2007 Soil respiration under +CO 2 +O 3 treatment was 5

- 25% higher than under elevated CO 2 treatment. Pregitzer et al. (2008 ); Pr egitzer et al. (2006 )

Soil C formation 1998

- 2001 O 3 reduced the formation rates of total soil C by 51% and acid

- insoluble soil C by 48% Loya et al. (2003 )

2004

- 2008 No significa nt effect of O 3 on the new C formed under elevated CO 2 Talhelm et al. (2009 )

Soil Respiration

Ozone has shown inconsistent impacts on soil respiration. A sun

- lit 

### 11

controlled

- environment chamber study found that O 3 had no significa nt effects on soil 

### 12 respiration, fine root biomass or any of the soil organisms in a reconstructed ponderosa 

### 13 pine/soil

- litter system ( Tingey et al., 2006 ) . In an adult European beech/Norwa y spruce 

### 14 forest at Kranzberg Forest, the free air O 3 fumigation (AOT40 of 10.2

- 117 ppm

- h) 

### 15 increased soil respiration under both beech and spruce during a humid year ( Nikolova et 

### 16
al., 2010 ) . The increased soil respiration under beech has been accompanied by the 

### 17

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 82 June 2012 increase in fine root biomass and ectomycorrhizal fungi diversity and turnover ( Grebenc 

### 1 and Kraigher, 2007 ) . The stimulating effect on soil respiration disappeared under spruce 

### 2 in a dry year, which was associated with a decrease in fine root production in spruce 

### 3 under drought. This finding suggested that drought was a more dominant stress than O 3 

### 4 for spruce ( Nikolova et al., 2010 )

. Andersen et al. (2010 ) labeled the canopies of 

### 5 European beech and Norway spruce with CO 2 depleted in 13 C at the same site. They did 

### 6 not observe any significa nt changes in soil respiration for either species. 

### 7

The nearly 10 year long studies at Asp en FACE indicated that the response of soil 

### 8 respiration to O 3 interacted with CO 2 exposure and varied temporally ( Table 9

- 7 ) 

### 9
( Pregi tzer et al., 2008 ; Pregitzer et al., 2006 ; King et al., 2001 ) . Ozone treatment alone 

### 10 generally had the lowest mean soil respiration rates, although those differences between 

### 11

control and elevated O 3 were usually not significa nt. However, soil respiration rates were 

### 12

different with O 3 alone and when acting in combination with elevated CO 2 . In the first 

### 13

five years (1998

- 2002), soil respiration under +CO 2 +O 3 treatment was similar to that 

### 14

under control and lower than that under +CO 2 treatment ( Pregitzer et al., 2006 ; King et 

### 15
al., 2001 ) . Since 2003, +CO 2 +O 3 treatment started to show the greatest impact on soil 

### 16 respiration. Compared to elevated CO 2 , soil respiration rate under +CO 2 +O 3 treatment 

### 17

was 15

- 25% higher from 2003

- 2004, and 5

- 10% higher from 2005

- 2007 ( Pregitzer et al., 

### 18

2008 ; Pregitzer et al., 2006 ) . Soil respiration was highly correlated with the biomass of 

### 19

roots with diameters of <2 mm and <1 mm, across plant community and atmospheric 

### 20

treatments. The aut hors suggested that the increase in soil respiration rate may be due to 

### 21

+CO 2 +O 3 increased fine root (<1.0 mm) biomass production ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 )

. 

### 22

Changes in leaf chemistry and productivity due to O 3 exposure have been shown to affect 

### 23 herbivore growth and abundance (See Section 9.4.9.1 ). Canopy insects could affect soil 

### 24 carbon and nutrient cycling through frass deposition, or altering chemistry and quantity 

### 25 of litter input to the forest floor. A study at the Aspen FACE found that although elevated 

### 26

O 3 affected the chemistry of frass and greenfall, these changes had small impact on 

### 27 microbial respiration and no effect on nitrogen leaching ( Hillstrom et al., 2010a )

. 

### 28 However, respiratory carbon loss and nitrate immobilization were nearly double in 

### 29 microcosms receiving herbivore inputs than those receiving no he rbivore inputs 

### 30
( Hillstrom et al., 2010a )

. 

### 31

Soil Carbon Formation

Ozone

- induced reductions in plant growt h can result in reduced C input to soil and 

### 32

therefore soil C content ( Andersen, 2003 ) . The simulations of most ecosystem models 

### 33 support this prediction ( Ren et al., 2007b ; Zhang et al., 2007a ; Felzer et al., 2004 )

. 

### 34 However, very few studies have directly measured soil C dynamics under elevated O 3
. 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 83 June 2012 After the first four years of fumigation (from 1998 to 2001) at the Aspen FACE site, 

### 1 Loya et al. (2003 ) found that forest stands exposed to both elevated O 3 and CO 2 

### 2
accumulated 51% less total soil C, and 48% less acid

- insoluble soil C compared to stands 

### 3 exposed only to elevated CO 2 . Soil organic carbon (SOC) was continuously monitored at 

### 4 the Aspen FACE site, and the later data showed that the initial reduction in new 

### 5

C formation (soil C derived from plant litter since the start of the experiment) by O 3 

### 6

under elevated CO 2 is only a temporary effect ( Table 9

- 7 ) ( Talhelm et al., 2009 ) . The 

### 7

amount of new soil C in the elevated CO 2 and the combined elevated CO 2 and O 3 

### 8 treatments has converged since 200 2. There was no significa nt effect of O 3 on the new C 

### 9

formed under elevated CO 2 over the last four years of the study (2004

- 2008). Talhelm et 

### 10
al. (2009 ) suggested the observed reduction in the early years of the experiment might be 

### 11 driven by a suppression of C allocated to fine root biomass. During the early exposure 

### 12
years, O 3 had no significa nt impact on fine root production ( King et al., 2001 ) . However, 

### 13

the effect of O 3 on fine root biomass was observed later in the experiment. Ozone 

### 14 increased fine root production and the highest fine root b iomass was observed under the 

### 15

combined elevated CO 2 and O 3 treatment in the late exposure years ( Table 9

- 7 ) ( Pregitzer 

### 16
et al., 2006 ) . This increase in fine root production was due to changes in community 

### 17 composition , such as better survival of an O 3 - tolerant aspen genotype, birch and maple, 

### 18 rather than changes in C allocation at the individual tree level ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Zak 

### 19
et al., 2007 )

. 

### 20

9.4.6.4 Nutrient Cycling

Ozone can affect nutrient cycling by changing nutrient release from litter, nutrient uptake 

### 21 by plants, and soil microbial activity. Nitrogen is the limiting nutrient for most temperate 

### 22 ecosystems, and several studies examine d N dynamics under elevated O 3 . Nutrient 

### 23 mineralization from decomposing organic matter is important for sustaining ecosystem 

### 24 production. Holmes et al. (2006 ) found that elevated O 3 decreased gross N mineralization 

### 25 at the Aspen FACE site, indicating that O 3 may reduce N availability. Other N cycling 

### 26 processes, such as NH 4 + immobilization, gross nitrification, microbial biomass N and soil 

### 27 organic N, were not affected by elevated O 3 ( Holmes et al., 2006 ) . Similarly, Kanerva et 

### 28
al. (2006 ) found total N, NO 3 - , microbial biomass N, potential nitrification and 

### 29

denitr ification in their meadow mesocosms were not affected by elevated O 3 (40

- 50 ppb). 

### 30

Ozone was found to decrease soil mineral N content at SoyFACE, which was likely 

### 31 caused by a reduction in plant material input and increased denitrification ( Pujol Pereira 

### 32
et al., 2011 ) . Oz one also showed small impact on other micro and macro nutrients. Liu et 

### 33
al. (2007 ) a) assessed N, P, K, S, Ca, Mg, Mn, B, Zn and Cu release dynamics at Aspen 

### 34 FACE, and they found that O 3 had no effects on most nutrients, except to decrease N and 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 84 June 2012 Ca release from litter. These studies reviewed abov e suggest that soil N cycling processes 

### 1 are not affected or slightly reduced by O 3 exposure. However, in a lysimeter study with 

### 2 young beech trees, Stoelken et al. (2010 ) found that elevated O 3 stimulated N release 

### 3 from litter which was largely attributed to an enhanced mobilization of inert nitrogen 

### 4

fraction. 

### 5

Using the SImple NItrogen Cycle model (SINIC), Hong et al. (2006 ) evaluated the 

### 6 impacts of O 3 exposure on soil N dynamics and streamflow nitrate flux. The detrimental 

### 7

effect of O 3 on plant growth was found to reduce plant uptake of N and therefore increase 

### 8 nitrate leaching. Their model simulation indicated that ambient O 3 exposure increased the 

### 9 mean annual stream flow nitrate export by 12% (0.042 g N/m 2 /year) at the Hubbard 

### 10 Brook Experimental Watershed from 1964

- 1994 ( Hong et al., 2006 )

. 

### 11

9.4.6.5 Dissolved Organic Carbon and Biogenic Trace Gases E mission

The O 3 - induced changes in plant growth, C and N fluxes to soil and microbial 

### 12 metabolism can alter other biogeochemical cycling processes, such as soil dissolved 

### 13 organic carbon (DOC) turnover and trace gases emission. 

### 14

Jones et al. (2009 ) collected fen cores from two peatlands in North Wales, UK and 

### 15 exposed them to one of four levels of O 3 (AOT40 of 0, 3.69, 5.87 and 13.80 ppm

- h for 

### 16

41 days). They found the concentration of porewater DOC in fen cores was significa ntly 

### 17 decreased by increased O 3 exposure. A reduction of the low molecular weight fraction of 

### 18

DOC was concurrent with the observed decrease in DOC concentrati on. Their results 

### 19 suggested that O 3 damage to overlying vegetation may decrease utilizable C flux to soil. 

### 20
Microbes, therefore, have to use labile C in the soil to maintain their metabolism, which, 

### 21 the authors hypothesized, leads to a decreased DOC concent ration with a shift of the 

### 22 DOC composition to more aromatic, higher molecular weight organic compounds. 

### 23

Several studies since the 2006 O 3 AQCD have examined the impacts of O 3 on nitrous 

### 24
oxide (N 2 O) and methane (CH 4 ) emission. Kanerva et al. (2007 ) measured the fluxes of 

### 25

N 2 O and CH 4 in meadow m esocosms, which were exposed to elevated CO 2 and O 3 in 

### 26

OTCs in south

- western Finland. They found that the daily N 2 O fluxes were decreased in 

### 27

the NF+O 3 (non

- filtered air + elevated O 3 , 40

- 50 ppb) after three seasons of exposure. 

### 28

Elevated O 3 alone or combined with CO 2 did not have any significa nt effect on the daily 

### 29

fluxes of CH 4 ( Kanerva et al., 2007 ) . In another study conducted in central Finland, the 

### 30

4 year open air O 3 fumigation (AOT40 of 20.8

- 35.5 ppm

- h for growing season) slightly 

### 31 increased potential CH 4 oxidation by 15% in the peatland m icrocosms, but did not affect 

### 32 the rate of potential CH 4 production or net CH 4 emissions, which is the net result of the 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 85 June 2012 potential CH 4 production and oxidation ( Morsky et al., 200 8 ) . However, several studies 

### 1

found that O 3 could significa ntly reduce CH 4 emission. Toet et al. (2011 ) exp osed 

### 2 peatland mesocosms to O 3 in OTCs for two years, and found that CH 4 emissions were 

### 3 significa ntly reduced by about 25% during midsummer periods of both years. In an OTC 

### 4 study of rice paddy, Zheng et al. (2011 ) found that the daily mean CH 4 emissions were 

### 5 significa ntly lower under elevated O 3 treatments than those in charcoal

- filtered air and 

### 6 nonfiltered air treatments. They found that the seasonal mean CH 4 emissions were 

### 7 negatively related with AOT40, but positively related to the relative rice yield, 

### 8 aboveground biomass and underground biomass. 

### 9

9.4.6.6 Summary

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, more evidence has shown that although the responses are 

### 10 often site specific, O 3 altered the quality and quantity of litter input to soil, microbial 

### 11 community composition, and C and nutrient cycling. Biogeochemical cycling of below



### 12 ground processes is fueled by C input from plants. Studies at the leaf and plant level have 

### 13 provided bi ologically plausible mechanisms, such as reduced photosynthetic rates, 

### 14
increased metabolic cost, and reduced root C allocation for the association of O 3 exposure 

### 15

and the alteration of below

- ground processes. 

### 16

Results from Aspen FACE and other experimental studies consistently found that O 3 

### 17 reduced litter production and altered C chemistry, such as soluble sugars, soluble 

### 18 phenolics, condensed tannins, lignin, and macro/micro nutrient concentration in litter 

### 19
( Parsons et al., 2008 ; Kasurinen et al., 2006 ; Liu et al., 2005 ) . Under elevated O 3 , the 

### 20 changes in substrate quality and quantity could alter microbial metabolism and therefore 

### 21 soil C and nutrient cycling. Several studies indicated that O 3 suppressed soil e nzyme 

### 22

activities ( Pritsch et al., 2009 ; Chung et al., 2006 ) . However, the impact of O 3 on litter 

### 23 decomposition was inconsistent and varied among species, sites and exposure length. 

### 24 Similarly, O 3 had inconsistent impa cts on dynamics of micro and macro nutrients. 

### 25

Studies from the Aspen FACE experiment suggested that the response of below

- ground 

### 26

C cycle to O 3 exposure, such as litter decomposition, soil respiration and soil C content, 

### 27 changed over time. For example, in the early part of the experiment (1998

- 2003), O 3 had 

### 28 no impact on soil respiration but reduced the formation rates of total soil C under 

### 29

elevated CO 2 . However, after 10

- 11 years of exposure, O 3 was found to increase soil 

### 30 respiration but have no significa nt impact on soil C formation under elevated CO 2
. 

### 31

The evidence is sufficient to infer that there is a causal relationship between O 3 

### 32
exposure and the alteration of below

- ground biogeochemical cycles. 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 86 June 2012 9.4.7 Community C omposition

The effects of O 3 on species competition (AX9.3.3.4) and community composition 

### 1
(AX9.6.4) were summarized in the 2006 O 3 AQCD. Plant species differ in their 

### 2 sensitivity to O 3 . Further, different genotypes of a given species also vary in their 

### 3 sensitivity. This differential sensitivity could change the competitive interactions that 

### 4

lead to loss in O 3 sensitive species or genotypes. In addition, O 3 exposure has been found 

### 5 to alter reproductive processes in plants (See Section 9.4.3.3 ). Changes in reproductive 

### 6 success could lead to changes in species composition. However, since ecosystem

- level 

### 7 responses result from the interaction of organisms with one another and with the ir 

### 8 physical environment, it takes longer for a change to develop to a level of prominence at 

### 9 which it can be identified and measured. A shift in community composition in forest and 

### 10 grassland ecosystems noted in the 2006 O 3 AQCD has continued to be observed from 

### 11 experimental and gradient studies. Additionally, research since the last review has shown 

### 12

that O 3 can alter community composition and diversity of soil microbial communities. 

### 13

9.4.7.1 Forest

In the San Bernardino Mountains in southern California, O 3 pollution caused a significa nt 

### 14 decline in ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa ) and Jeffrey pine ( Pinus jeffreyi ) ( U.S. EPA, 

### 15

2006b ) . Pine trees in the young mature age class group exhibited higher mortality rates 

### 16 compared with mature trees at a site with severe O 3 visible foliar injury. The vulnerability 

### 17 of young mature pines was most likely caused by the fact that trees in this age class were 

### 18 emerging into the canopy, where higher O 3 concentrations were encountered ( McBride 

### 19
and Laven, 1999 ) . Because of the loss of O 3 - sensitive pines, mixed forests of ponderosa 

### 20 pine, Jeffery Pine and white fir ( Abies concolor ) shifted to predominantly white fir 

### 21
( Miller, 1973 ) . Ozone may have indirectly caused the decline in understory diversity in 

### 22

coniferous forests in the San Bern ardino Mountains through an increase in pine litterfall. 

### 23

This increase in litterfall from O 3 exposure results in an understory layer that may 

### 24 prohibit the establishment of native herbs, but not the exotic annual Galium aparine 

### 25
( Allen et al., 2007 )

. 

### 26

Ozone damage to conifer forests has also been obse rved in several other regions. In the 

### 27 Valley of Mexico, a widespread mortality of sacred fir ( Abies religiosa ) was observed in 

### 28 the heavily polluted area of the Desierto de los Leones National Park in the early 1980s 

### 29
( de Lourdes de Bauer and Hernandez

- Tejeda, 2007 ; Fenn et al., 2002 ) . Ozone damage 

### 30 was widely believed to be an important causal factor in the dramatic decline of sacred fir. 

### 31 In alpine regions of souther n France and the Carpathians Mountains, O 3 was also 

### 32 considered as the major cause of the observed decline in cembran pine ( Pinus cembra ) 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 87 June 2012 ( Wieser et al., 2006 ) . However, many environmental factors such as light, temperature, 

### 1 nutrient and soil moisture, and climate extremes such as unusual dry and wet periods 

### 2

could interact with O 3 and alter the response of forest to O 3 exposure. For those pollution 

### 3 gradient studies, several confounding factors, such as drought, insect outbreak and forest 

### 4 management, may also contribute to or even be the dominant factors causing the 

### 5 mortality of trees ( de Lourdes de Bauer and Hernandez

- Tejeda, 2007 ; Wieser et al., 

### 6

2006 )

. 

### 7

Recent evidence from long

- term free O 3 fumigation experiments provided additional 

### 8

supp ort for the potential impacts of O 3 on species competition and community 

### 9 composition changes in forest ecosystems. At the Aspen FACE site, community 

### 10 composition at both the genetic and species levels was altered after seven years of 

### 11 fumigation with O 3 ( Kubiske et al., 2007 ) . In the pure aspen community, O 3 fumigation 

### 12 reduced growth and increased mortality of sensitive clone 259, while the O 3 tolerant 

### 13 clone 8L emerged as the dominant clone. Growth of clone 8L was even greater under 

### 14

elevated O 3 compared to controls, probably due to O 3 alleviated competitive pressure on 

### 15 clone 8L by reducing growth of other clones. In the mixed aspen

- birch and aspen

- maple 

### 16
communities, O 3 reduced the competitive capacity of aspen compared to birch and maple 

### 17
( Kubiske et al., 2007 ) . In a phytotron study, O 3 fumigation reduced growth of beech but 

### 18 not spruce in mixed culture, suggesting a higher susceptibility of beech to O 3 under 

### 19 interspecific competition ( Kozovits et al., 2 005 )

. 

### 20

9.4.7.2 Grassland and Agricultural Land

The response of managed pasture, often cultivated as a mixture of grasses and clover, to 

### 21

O 3 pollution has been studied for many years. The tendency for O 3 - exposure to shift the 

### 22 biomass of grass

- legume mixtures in fa vor of grass species, reported in the previous O 3 

### 23 AQCD has been generally confirmed by recent studies. In a mesocosm study, Trifolium 

### 24

repens and Lolium perenne mixtures were exposed to an episodic rural O 3 regime within 

### 25

solardomes for 12 weeks. T. repens s howed significa nt changes in biomass but not L. 

### 26

perenne , and the proportion of T. repens decreased in O 3 - exposed mixtures compared to 

### 27

the control ( Hayes et al., 2009 ) . The changes in community composition of grass

- legume



### 28 forb mixtures were also observed at the Le Mouret FACE experiment, Switzerland. 

### 29 During the 5

- year O 3 fumigation (AOT40 of 13.3

- 59.5 ppm

- h ), the dominance of 

### 30 legumes in fumigated plots declined more quickly than those in the control plots ( Volk et 

### 31
al., 2006 ) . However, Stampfli and Fuhrer (2010 ) re analyzed the species and soil data and 

### 32 suggested that Volk et al. (2006 ) overestimated the O 3 effect. Stampfli and Fuhrer (2010 ) 

### 33 found that the difference in the speci es dynamics between control and O 3 treatment was 

### 34 more caused by heterogeneous initial conditions than O 3 exposure

. Several studies also 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 88 June 2012 suggested that mature/species

- rich ecosystems were more resilient to O 3 exposure. At 

### 1 another FACE experiment, located at Alp Flix, Switzerland, O 3 fumigation (AOT40 of 

### 2

15.2

- 64.9 ppm

- h ) showed no significa nt impact on community composition of this 

### 3 species

- rich pasture ( Bassin et al., 2007b ) . Although most studies demonstrated an 

### 4 increase in grass:forb ratio with O 3 exposure ( Hayes et al., 2009 ; U.S. EPA, 2006b ) , a 

### 5 study on a simulated upland grassland community showed that O 3 reduced the grass:forb 

### 6

ratio ( Hayes et al., 2010 ) which may be due to the grass species in this community. The 

### 7 grass species studied by Hayes et al. (2010 )

, Anthoxanthum odoratum , was mor e 

### 8

sensitive to O 3 than other grass species such as L. perenne ( Hayes et al., 2009 )

. Pfleeger 

### 9
et al. (2010 ) collected seed bank soil from an agricul tural field and examined how the 

### 10 plant community responded over several generations to elevated O 3 exposures. Sixty 

### 11 plant species from 22 families emerged in the chambers over their four year study. 

### 12 Overall, they found that O 3 appeared to have small impact s on seed germination and only 

### 13 a minor effect on species richness of pioneer plant communities. 

### 14

Several review papers have discussed the physiological and ecological characteristics of 

### 15

O 3 - sensitive herbaceous plants. Hayes et al. (2007 ) assessed species traits associated with 

### 16

O 3 sensitivity by the changes in biomass caused by O 3 exposure. Plants o f the therophyte 

### 17
(e.g., annual) life form were particularly sensitive to O 3 . Species with higher mature leaf 

### 18

N concentration tended to be more sensitive than those with lower leaf N concentration. 

### 19 Plants growing under high oxidative stress environments, su ch as high light or high 

### 20
saline, were more sensitive to O 3 . Using the same dataset from Hayes et al. (2007 )

, Mills 

### 21
et al. (2007b ) identif ied the O 3 sensitive communities. They found that the largest number 

### 22

of these O 3 sensitive communities were associated with grassland ecosystems. Among 

### 23 grassland ecosystems, alpine grassland, sub

- alpine grassland, woodland fringe, and dry 

### 24 grassland were id entified as the most sensitive communities. 

### 25

9.4.7.3 Microbes

Several methods have been used to study microbial composition changes associated with 

### 26

elevated O 3 . Phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) analysis is widely used to determine whether 

### 27

O 3 elicits an overall effect on microbial community composition. However, since PLFA 

### 28 markers cover a broad range of different fungi, resolution of this method may be not fine 

### 29 enough to detect small changes in the composition of fungal communities. Methods, such 

### 30 as microscopic analyse s and polymerase chain reaction

– denaturing gradient gel 

### 31 electrophoresis (PCR

– DGGE), have better resolution to specifically analyze the fungal 

### 32 community composition. The resolution differences among those methods needs to be 

### 33 considered when assessing the O 3 impact on microbial community composition. 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 89 June 2012 Kanerva et a l. (2008 ) found that elevated O 3 (40

- 50 ppb) decreased total, bacterial, 

### 1 actinobacterial and fungal PLFA biomass values as well as fungal:bacterial PLFA 

### 2

biomass ratio in their meadow mesocosms in south

- western Finland. The relative 

### 3 proportions of indivi dual PLFAs between the control and elevated O 3 treatments were 

### 4 significa ntly different, suggesting that O 3 modified the structure of the microbial 

### 5 community. Morsky et al. (2008 ) exposed boreal peatland microcosms to elevated O 3 , 

### 6 with growing season AOT40 of 20.8

- 35.3 ppm

- h, in an open

- air O 3 exposure field in 

### 7

Central Finland. They also found that microbial composition was altered after three 

### 8 growing seasons with O 3 fumigation, as measured by PLFA. Ozone tended to increase 

### 9 the presence of Gram

- positive bacteria and the biomass of fungi in the peatland 

### 10 microcosms. Ozone also resulted in higher microbial biomass, which co

- occurred with 

### 11

the increases in concentrations of organic acids and leaf density of sedges ( Morsky et al., 

### 12

2008 ) . In a lysimeter experiment in Germany, O 3 was found to alter the PLFA profiles in 

### 13 the upper 0

- 20 cm rhizosph ere soil of European beech. Elevated O 3 reduced bacterial 

### 14 abundance but had no detectable effect on fungal abundance ( Pritsch et al., 2009 ) . Using 

### 15 microscopic analyses, Kasurinen et al. (2005 ) found that elevated O 3 , wit h 5 or 6 months 

### 16

of AOT40 of 20.6

- 30.9 ppm

- h, decreased the proportions of black and liver

- brown 

### 17 mycorrhizas and increased that of light brown/orange mycorrhizas. In an herbaceous 

### 18 plant study, SSCP (single

- strand conformation polymorphism) profiles indicate d that O 3 

### 19
stress (about 75 ppb) had a very small effect on the structural diversity of the bacterial 

### 20 community in rhizospheres ( Dohrmann and Tebbe, 2005 ) . At the Aspen FACE site, O 3 

### 21

had no significa nt effect on fungal relative abundance, as indicated by PLFA profile. 

### 22
However, elevated O 3 altered fungal community composition, according to the 

### 23 identification of 39 fungal taxonomic units from soil using polymerase chain reaction

– 

### 24 denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR

- DGGE) ( Chung et al., 2006 ) . In another 

### 25 study at Aspen FACE, phylogenetic analysis suggested that O 3 exposure altered the 

### 26 agaricomycete community. The ectomycorrhizal communities developing under elevated 

### 27

O 3 had higher proportions of Cortinarius and Inocyb e species, and lower proportions of 

### 28

Laccaria and Tomentella ( Edwards and Zak, 2011 ) . Ozone was found to change 

### 29 microbial community composition in an agricultural system. Chen et al. (2010b ) found 

### 30

elevated O 3 (100

- 150 ppb) had significa nt effects on soil microbial composition 

### 31 expressed as PLFA percentage in a rice paddy in China. 

### 32

9.4.7.4 Summary

In the 2006 O 3 AQCD, the impact of O 3 exposure on species competition and community 

### 33 composition was assessed. Ozone was found to cause a significa nt decline in ponderosa 

### 34 and Jeffrey pine in the San Bernardino Mountains in southern California. Ozone exposure 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 90 June 2012 also tended to shift the grass

- legu me mixtures in favor of grass species ( U.S. EPA, 

### 1

2006b ) . Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, more evidence has shown that O 3 exposure changed 

### 2 the competitive interactions and could lead to loss of O 3 sensitive species or genotypes. 

### 3 Studies at plant level found that the severity of O 3 damage on growth, reproduction and 

### 4 foliar inj ury varied among species, which provided the biological plausibility for the 

### 5 alteration of community composition. Additionally, research since the last review has 

### 6

shown that O 3 can alter community composition and diversity of soil microbial 

### 7

communities. 

### 8

Th e decline of conifer forests under O 3 exposure was continually observed in several 

### 9 regions. Ozone damage was believed to be an important causal factor in the dramatic 

### 10 decline of sacred fir in the valley of Mexico ( de Lourdes de Bauer and Hernandez



### 11 Tejeda, 2007 ) , as well as cembran pine in southern France and the Carpathian Mountains 

### 12
( Wieser et al., 2006 ) . Results from the Aspen FACE site indicated that O 3 could alter 

### 13 community comp osition of broadleaf forests as well. At the Aspen FACE site, O 3 

### 14 reduced growth and increased mortality of a sensitive aspen clone, while the O 3 tolerant 

### 15 clone emerged as the dominant clone in the pure aspen community. In the mixed aspen



### 16 birch and aspen

- ma ple communities, O 3 reduced the competitive capacity of aspen 

### 17 compared to birch and maple ( Kubiske et al., 2007 )

. 

### 18

The tendency for O 3 - exposure to shift the biomass of grass

- legume mixtures in favor of 

### 19 grass species, was reported in the 2006 O 3 AQCD and has been generally confirmed by 

### 20 recent studies. However, in a high elevation mature/species

- rich grass

- legume pasture , O 3 

### 21 fumigation showed no significa nt impact on community composition ( Bassin e t al., 

### 22

2007b )

. 

### 23

Ozone exposure not only altered community composition of plant species, but also 

### 24 microorganisms. The shift in community composition of bacteria and fungi has been 

### 25 observed in both natural and agricultural ecosystems, although no general p atterns could 

### 26

be identified ( Kanerva et al., 2008 ; Morsky et al., 2008 ; Kasurinen et al., 2005 )

. 

### 27

The evidence is sufficient to conclude that there is likely to be a causal relationship 

### 28

between O 3 exposure and the alteration of community composition of some 

### 29
ecosystems. 

### 30

9.4.8 Factors that Modify Functiona l and Growth Response

Many biotic and abiotic factors, including insects, pathogens, root microbes and fungi, 

### 31 temperature, water and nutrient availability, and other air pollutants, as well as elevated 

### 32

CO 2 , influence or alter plant response to O 3 . These mo difying factors were 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 91 June 2012 comprehensively reviewed in AX9.3 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD and thus, this section serves 

### 1 mainly as a brief summary of the previous findings. A limited number of new studies 

### 2 published since the 2006 O 3 AQCD add to the understanding of the ro le of these 

### 3 interactions in modifying O 3 - induced plant responses. Many of these modifying factors 

### 4 and interactions are integrated into discussions elsewhere in this chapter and the reader is 

### 5

directed to those sections. 

### 6

9.4.8.1 Genetics

It is well known that specie s vary greatly in their responsiveness to O 3 . Even within a 

### 7 given species, individual genotypes or populations can also vary significa ntly with 

### 8
respect to O 3 sensitivity ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Therefore, caution should be taken when 

### 9 considering a species’ degree of sensitivity to O 3 . Plant response to O 3 is determined by 

### 10 genes that are directly related to oxidant stress and to an unknown number of genes that 

### 11 are not specifically related to oxidants, but instead control leaf and cell wall thickness, 

### 12
stomatal conductance, and the internal architecture of th e air spaces. It is rarely the case 

### 13 that single genes are responsible for O 3 tolerance. Studies using molecular biological 

### 14 tools and transgenic plants have positively verified the role of various genes and gene 

### 15 products in O 3 tolerance and are continuing t o increase the understanding of O 3 toxicity 

### 16

and differences in O 3 sensitivity. See Section 9.3.3.2 of this document for a discussion of 

### 17

recent studi es related to gene expression changes in response to O 3
. 

### 18

9.4.8.2 Environmental Biological Factors

As stated in the 2006 O 3 AQCD, the biological factors within the plant’s environment 

### 19 that may influence its response to O 3 encompass insects and other animal pests, d iseases, 

### 20 weeds, and other competing plant species. Ozone may influence the severity of a disease 

### 21 or infestation by a pest or weed, either by direct effects on the causal species, or 

### 22 indirectly by affecting the host, or both. In addition, the interaction be tween O 3 , a plant, 

### 23 and a pest, pathogen, or weed may influence the response of the target host species to O 3 

### 24
( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . Several recent studies on the effects of O 3 on insects via their 

### 25 interactions with plants are discussed in Section 9.4.9.1 . In addition, O 3 has also been 

### 26
shown to alter soil fauna communities (Section 9.4.9.2 ). 

### 27

In contrast to detr imental biological interactions, there are mutually beneficial 

### 28 relationships or symbioses involving higher plants and bacteria or fungi. These include 

### 29 (1) the nitrogen

- fixing species Rhizobium and Frankia that nodulate the roots of legumes 

### 30
and alder and (2 ) the mycorrhizae that infect the roots of many crop and tree species, all 

### 31

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 92 June 2012 of which may be affected by exposure of the host plants to O 3 . Some discussion of 

### 1 mycorrhizae can be found in Section 9.4.6

. 

### 2

In addition to the interactions involving animal pests, O 3 also has indirect effects on 

### 3 higher herbivorous animals, e.g., livestock, due to O 3 - induced changes in feed quality. 

### 4

Recent studies on the effects of O 3 on nutritive quality of plants are discussed in 

### 5

Section 9.4.4.2

. 

### 6

Intra

- and interspecific competition are also important fac tors in determining vegetation 

### 7 response to O 3 . Plant competition involves the ability of individual plants to acquire the 

### 8 environmental resources needed for growth and development: light, water, nutrients, and 

### 9 space. Intraspecific competition involves indi viduals of the same species, typically in 

### 10 monoculture crop situations, while interspecific competition refers to the interference 

### 11 exerted by individuals of different species on each other when they are in a mixed 

### 12 culture. This topic was previously reviewed in AX9.3.3.4 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD. Recent 

### 13 studies on competition and its implications for community composition are discussed in 

### 14

Section 9.4.7

. 

### 15

9.4.8.3 Phys ical Factors

Physical or abiotic factors play a large role in modifying plant response to O 3 , and have 

### 16 been extensively discussed in previous O 3 AQCDs. This section summarizes those 

### 17 findings as well as recent studies published since the last review. 

### 18

Although some studies have indicated that O 3 impact significa ntly increases with 

### 19 increased ambient temperature ( Ball et al., 2000 ; Mills et al., 2000 ) , other studies have 

### 20 indicated that temperature has little effect ( Balls et al., 1996 ; Fredericksen et al., 1996 ) . A 

### 21 recent study by Riikonen et al. Riikonen et al. ( 2009 ) at the Ruohoniemi open air 

### 22 exposure field in Kuopio, Finland found that the effects of temperature and O 3 on total 

### 23 leaf area and photosynthesis of Betula pendula were counteractive. Elevated O 3 reduced 

### 24 the saplings’ ability to utilize the warmer g rowth environment by increasing the stomatal 

### 25 limitation for photosynthesis and by reducing the redox state of ascorbate in the apoplast 

### 26 in the combination treatment as compared to temperature alone ( Riikonen et al., 2009 )

. 

### 27

Temperature affects the rates of all physiological processes based on enzyme catalysis 

### 28 and diffusion; each process and overall growth (the integral of all processes) h as a 

### 29 distinct optimal temperature range. It is important to note that a plant’s response to 

### 30 changes in temperature will depend on whether it is growing near its optimum 

### 31 temperature for growth or near its maximum temperature ( Rowland

- Bamford, 2000 )

. 

### 32 However, temperature is very likely an important variable affecting plant O 3 response in 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 93 June 2012 the presence of the elevated CO 2 levels contributing to global climate change. In contrast, 

### 1 some evidence suggests that O 3 exposure sensitizes plants to low temperature stress 

### 2
( Colls and Unsworth, 1992 ) and, also, that O 3 decreases below

- ground carbohydrate 

### 3 reserves, which may lead to responses in perennial species ranging from rapid demise to 

### 4 impaired growth in subsequent seasons (i.e., carry

- over effects) ( Andersen et al., 1997 )

. 

### 5

Light, a component of the plant’s physical environment, is an essential “resource” of 

### 6 energy content that drive s photosynthesis and C assimilation. It has been suggested that 

### 7 increased light intensity may increase the O 3 sensitivity of light

- tolerant species while 

### 8 decreasing that of shade

- tolerant species, but this appears to be an oversimplification with 

### 9

many exce ptions. Several studies suggest that the interaction between O 3 sensitivity and 

### 10 light environment is complicated by the developmental stage as well as the light 

### 11 environment of individual leaves in the canopy ( Kitao et al., 2009 ; Topa et al., 2001 ; 

### 12 Chappelka and Samuelson, 1998 )

. 

### 13

Although the relative humidity of the ambient air has generally been found to increase the 

### 14

effects of O 3 by increasing stomatal conductance (thereby increasing O 3 flux into the 

### 15

lea ves), abundant evidence also indicates that the ready availability of soil moisture 

### 16 results in greater O 3 sensitivity ( Mills, 2002 ) . The partial “protection” against the effects 

### 17

of O 3 afforded by drought has been observed in field experiments ( Low et al., 2006 ) and 

### 18 modeled in computer simulations ( Broadmead ow and Jackson, 2000 ) . Conversely, 

### 19 drought may exacerbate the effects of O 3 on plants ( Pollastrini et al., 2010 ; Grulke et al., 

### 20

2003b ) . There is also some e vidence that O 3 can predispose plants to drought stress 

### 21
( Maier

- Maercker, 1998 ) . Hence, the nature of the response is largely species

- specific and 

### 22 will depend to some extent upon the sequence in which th e stressors occur. 

### 23

9.4.8.4 Interactions with other Pollutants

Ozone

- nitrogen interactions

Elevated O 3 exposure and N deposition often co

- occur. However, the interactions of O 3 

### 24 exposure and N deposition on vegetation are complex and less well understood compared 

### 25

to their independent effects. Consistent with the conclusion of the 2006 O 3 AQCD, the 

### 26 limited number of studies published since the last review indicated that the interactive 

### 27

effects of N and O 3 varied among species and ecosystems ( Table 9

- 8 ). To better 

### 28 understand these interactions in ecosystems across the U.S., more information is needed 

### 29 considering combined O 3 exposure and N deposition related effects. 

### 30

Nitrogen deposition could stimulate relative growth rate (RGR), and lead to increased 

### 31 stomatal conductance. Therefore, plants might become more susceptible to O 3 exposure. 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 94 June 2012 Alternatively, N deposition may increase the availability of photosynthates for use in 

### 1 detoxification and plants could become more tolerant to O 3 ( Bassin et al., 2007a ) . Only a 

### 2 few recent studies have investigated the int eractive effects of O 3 and N in the U.S. Grulke 

### 3
et al. (2005 ) measured stomatal co nductance of California black oak ( Quercus kelloggii ) 

### 4 at a long

- term N

- enrichment site located in the San Bernardino Mountains, which is 

### 5 accompanied by high O 3 exposure (80 ppb, 24

- h avg. over a six month growing season). 

### 6

The authors found that N amendment led to poor stomatal control in full sun in 

### 7 midsummer of the average precipitation years, but enhanced stomatal control in shade 

### 8 leaves of California black oak. In an OTC study, Handley and Grulke (2008 ) found that 

### 9

O 3 lowered photosynthetic ability and water

- use efficiency, and increased leaf chlorosis 

### 10 and necrosis of California black oak. Nitrogen fertili zation tended to reduce plant 

### 11 sensitivity to O 3 exposure; however, the interaction was not statistically significa nt. In 

### 12 another study, Grulke et al. ( 2008 ) reported that various lines of phenomenological and 

### 13 experimental evidence indicate that N deposition and O 3 pollution contribute to the 

### 14 susceptibi lity of forests to wildfire in t he San Bernadino Mountains by increasing stress 

### 15 due to drought, weakening trees, and predisposing them to bark beetle infestation 

### 16
( U.S. EPA, 2008; NOx/SOx ISA ). 

### 17

Studies conducted outside the U.S. are also summarized in Table 9

- 8 . Generally, the 

### 18 responses were species specific. The O 3 - induced reduction in photosynthetic rate and 

### 19

biomass loss wer e greater in the relatively high N treatment for watermelon ( Citrillus 

### 20

lanants ) ( Calatayud et al., 2006 ) and Japanese beech ( Fagus crenata ) seedlings 

### 21
( Yamaguchi et al., 2007 ) . However, there was no significa nt interactive effect of O 3 and 

### 22 N on biomass production for Quercus serrata seedlings ( Watanabe et al., 2007 ) , young 

### 23
Norway spruce ( Picea abies ) trees ( Thomas et al., 2005 ) , and young European beech 

### 24
( Fagus sylvatica ) trees Thomas et al. (2006 )

. 

### 25

Table 9

- 8 Response o f plants to the interactive effects of elevated ozone exposure and nitrogen enrichment.

Site Species Ozone exposure N addition Responses References

San Bernardino Mountains, U.S. California black oak ( Quercus kelloggii ) 80 ppb 0, and 50 kg N/ ha/yr N

- amended trees had lower late summer C gain and greater foliar chlorosis in the drought year, and poor stomatal control and lower leaf water use efficiency and in midsummer of the average precipitation year. Grulke et al. (2005 )

San Bernardino Mountains, U.S. California black oak ( Quercus kelloggii ) 0, 75, and 150 ppb 0, and 50 kg N/ ha/yr N fertilization tended to reduce plant sensitivity to O 3 exposure; however the interaction was not statistically significa nt. Handley and Grulke (2008 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 95 June 2012 Site Species Ozone exposure N addition Responses References

Switzerland Spruce trees ( Picea abies ) Filtered (19.4

- 28.1 ppb); ambient (37.6

- 47.4 ppb) 0, 20, 40 and 80 kg N/ ha/yr Higher N levels alleviated the negative impact of O 3 on root starch concentrati ons Thomas et al. (2005 )

Switzerland Beech trees ( Fagus sylvatica ) Filtered (19.4

- 28.1 ppb); ambient (37.6

- 47.4 ppb) 0, 20, 40 and 80 kg N/ ha/yr N addition amplified the negative effects of O 3 on leaf area and shoot elongation. Thomas et al. (2006 )

Switzerland Alpine pasture Ambient (AOT40 of 11.1

- 12.6 ppm

- h); 1.2 ambient (AOT40 of 15.2

- 29.5 ppm

- h) and 1.6 ambient (28.4

- 64.9 ppm

- h) 0, 5, 10, 25, 50 kg N/ ha/yr The positive effects of N addition
on canopy greenness were counteracted by accelerated leaf senescence in the highest O 3 treatment. Bassin et al. (2007b )

Switzerland Alpine pasture Ambient (AO T40 of 11.1

- 12.6 ppm

- h); 1.2 ambient (AOT40 of 15.2

- 29.5 ppm

- h) and 1.6 ambient (28.4

- 64.9 ppm

- h) 0, 5, 10, 25, 50 kg N/ha/yr Only a small number of species showed significa nt O 3 and N interactive effects on leaf chlorophyll concentration, leaf weight and change in 18 O, and the patterns were not consistent. Bassin et al. (2009 )

Switzerland Alpine pasture Ambient (AOT40 of 11.1

- 12.6 ppm

- h); 1.2 ambient (AOT40 of 15.2

- 29.5 ppm

- h) and 1.6 ambient (28.4

- 64.9 ppm

- h) 0, 5, 10, 25, 50 kg N/ ha/yr The positive effects of N addition
on canopy greenness were counteracted by accelerated leaf senescence in the highest O 3 treatment. Bassin et al. (2007b )

Switzerland Alpine pasture Ambient (AOT40 of 11.1

- 12.6 ppm

- h); 1.2 ambient (AOT40 of 15.2

- 29.5 ppm

- h) and 1.6 ambient (28.4

- 64.9 ppm

- h) 0, 5, 10’ 25, 50 kg N/ ha/yr Highest N addition resulted in carbon loss, but there was no interaction between O 3 and N treatments. Volk et al. (2011 )

Spain Watermelon ( Citrillus lanants ) O 3 free (AOT40 of 0 ppm

- h), ambient (AOT40 of 5.1

- 6.3 ppm

- h) and elevated O 3 (AOT40 of 32.5

- 35.6 ppm

- h) 140, 280, and 436 kg N/ ha/yr High N concentration enhanced the detrimental effects of O 3 on Chlorophyll a fluorescence parameters, lipid peroxidation, and the total yield. Calatayud et al. (2006 )

Spain Trifolium striatum Filtered (24

- h avg. of 8

- 22 ppb); ambient (29

- 34 ppb), elevated O 3 (35

- 56 ppb) 10, 30, and 60 kg N/ ha/yr O 3 reduced total aerial biomass. N fertilization counterbalanced O 3 - induced effects only when plants were exposed to moderate O 3 levels (ambient) but not under elevated O 3 concentrations. Sanz et al. (2007 )

Japan Japanese beech seedlings ( Fagus
crenata ) Filtered (24

- h avg. of 10.3

- 13.2 ppb); ambient (42.0

- 43.3 ppb), 1.5 ambient (62.6

- 63.9 ppb) and 2.0 ambient (82.7

- 84.7 ppb) 0, 20 and 50 kg N/ ha/yr The O 3 - induced reduction in net photosynthesis and whole

- plant dry mass were greater in the relatively high N treatment than that in the low N treatment. Yamaguchi et al. (2007 )

Japan Quercus
serrata seedlings Filtered (24

- h avg. of 10.3

- 13.2 ppb); ambient (42.0

- 43.3 ppb), 1.5 ambient (62.6

- 63.9 ppb) and 2.0 ambient (82.7

- 84.7 ppb) 0, 20 and 50 kg N/ ha/yr No significa nt interactive effects of O 3 and N load on the growth and net photosynthetic rate were detected. Watanabe et al. (2007 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 96 June 2012 Ozone

- carbon dioxide interactions

Several decades of research has shown that exposure to elevated CO 2 increases 

### 1 photosynthetic rates ( Bernacchi et al., 2006 ; Bernacchi et al., 2005 ; Tissue et al., 1999 ; 

### 2
Tissue et al., 1997 ; Will and Ceulemans, 1997 ) , decreases stomatal conducta nce 

### 3
( Ainswort h and Rogers, 2007 ; Paoletti et al., 2007 ; Bernacchi et al., 2006 ; Leakey et al., 

### 4

2006 ; Medlyn et al., 2001 ) and generally increases the growth of plants ( McCarthy et al., 

### 5

2009 ; Norby et al., 2005 ) . This is in contrast to the decrease in photosynthesis and growth 

### 6 in many plants that are exposed to elevated O 3 . The interactive effects on vegetation have 

### 7 been the subject of research in the past two decades due to the implications on 

### 8 producti vity and water use of ecosystems. This area of research was discussed in detail in 

### 9

AX9.3.8.1 of the 2006 O 3 AQCD and the conclusions made then are still relevant ( U.S. 

### 10
EPA, 2006b )

. 

### 11

The bulk of the available evidence shows that, under the various experimental conditions 

### 12 used (which almost exclusively employed abrupt o r “step” increases in CO 2 

### 13
concentration, as discussed below), increased CO 2 levels (ambient + 200 to 400 ppm) 

### 14

may protect plants from the negative effects of O 3 on growth. This protection may be 

### 15 afforded in part by CO 2 acting together with O 3 in inducing s tomatal closure, thereby 

### 16 reducing O 3 uptake, and in part by CO 2 reducing the negative effects of O 3 on Rubisco 

### 17 and its activity in CO 2 - fixation. Although both CO 2 - induced and O 3 - induced decreases in 

### 18 stomatal conductance have been observed primarily in short

- term studies, recent data 

### 19 show a long

- term and sustained reduction in stomatal conductance under elevated CO 2 

### 20 for a number of species ( Ainsworth and Long, 2005 ; Ellsworth et al., 2004 ; Gunderson et 

### 21
al., 2002 ) . Instances of increased stomatal conductance have also been observed in 

### 22
response to O 3 exposure, suggesting partial stomatal dysfunction after extended periods 

### 23 of exposure ( Paoletti and Grulke, 2010 ; Grulke et al., 2007a ; Maier

- Maercker, 1998 )

. 

### 24

Important caveats must be raised with regard to the findings presented in published 

### 25 research. The first caveat concerns the distinctly different n atures of the exposures to O 3 

### 26

and CO 2 experienced by plants in the field. Changes in the ambient concentrations of 

### 27 these gases have very different dynamics. In the context of climate change, CO 2 levels 

### 28 increase relatively slowly (globally 2 ppm/year) and m ay change little over several 

### 29 seasons of growth. On the other hand, O 3 presents a fluctuating stressor with considerable 

### 30

hour

- to

- hour, day

- to

- day and regional variability ( Polle and Pell, 1999 ) . Almost all of the 

### 31 evidence presented comes from experimentation involving plants subjected to an abrupt 

### 32 step increase to a higher, steady CO 2 concentration. In contrast, the O 3 exposure 

### 33 concentrations usually varied from day to day. Luo and Reynolds (199 9 )

, Hui et al. 

### 34
(2002 ) , and Luo (2001 ) noted the difficulties in pre dicting the likely effects of a gradual 

### 35

CO 2 increase from experiments involving a step increase or those using a range of CO 2 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 97 June 2012 concentrations. It is also important to note that the levels of elevated CO 2 in many of the 

### 1 studies will not be experienced in the field for 30 or 40 years, but elevated levels of O 3 

### 2 can occur presently in several areas of the U.S. Therefore, the CO 2 × O 3 interaction 

### 3 studies may be less relevant for current ambient conditions. 

### 4

Another caveat concerns the interactions of O 3 and CO 2 wi th other climatic variables, 

### 5 such as temperature and precipitation. In light of the key role played by temperature in 

### 6 regulating physiological processes and modifying plant response to increased CO 2 levels 

### 7
( Morison and Lawlor, 1999 ; Long, 1991 ) and the knowledge that relatively modest 

### 8 increases in temperature may lead to dramatic consequences in terms of plant 

### 9 development ( Lawlor, 1998 ) , it is important to consider that studying CO 2 and O 3 

### 10 interactions alone may not create a complete underst anding of effects on plants under 

### 11 future climate change. 

### 12

9.4.9 Insects and Other Wildlife

9.4.9.1 Insects

Insects may respond indirectly to changes in plants (i.e., increased reactive oxygen 

### 13 species, altered phytochemistry, altered nutrient content) that occur under elevated O 3 

### 14
conditions, or O 3 can have a direct effect on insect performance ( Menend ez et al., 2009 )

. 

### 15

Effects of O 3 on insects occur at the species level (i.e., growth, survival, reproduction, 

### 16 development, feeding behavior) and at the population and community

- level 

### 17
(i.e., population growth rate, community composition). In general, effe cts of O 3 on 

### 18 insects are highly context

- and species

- specific ( Lindroth, 2010 ; Bidart

- Bouzat and Imeh



### 19
Nathaniel, 2008 ) . Furthermore, plant responses to O 3 exposure and herbivore attack have 

### 20

been demonstr ated to share signaling pathways, complicating characterization of these 

### 21

stressors ( Lindroth, 2010 ; Menendez et al., 2010

, 2009 ) . Although both species

- level and 

### 22 population and community

- level responses to elevated O 3 are observed in field and 

### 23 laboratory studies discussed below, there is no consensus on how insects respond to 

### 24 feeding on O 3 – exposed plants. 

### 25

Species

- level responses

In considering insect growth, survival and reproduction in elevated O 3 conditions, severa l 

### 26 studies have indicated an effect while others have found no correlation. The performance 

### 27 of five herbivore species (three moths and two weevils) was assessed in an OTC 

### 28 experiment at 2 × ambient concentration ( Peltonen et al., 2010 ) . Growth of larvae of the 

### 29

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 98 June 2012 Autumnal mot h, Epirrita autumna , was significa ntly decreased in the O 3 treatment while 

### 1 no effects were observed in the other species. In an aphid oviposition preference study 

### 2 using birch buds grown in a three year OTC experiment, O 3 had neither a stimulatory or 

### 3

deterr ing effect on egg

- laying ( Peltonen et al., 2006 ) . Furthermore, changes in birch bud 

### 4 phenolic compounds associated with the doubled ambient concentrations of O 3 did not 

### 5 correlate with changes in aphid oviposition ( Peltonen et al., 2006 ) . Reproduction in 

### 6 Popillia japonica , that were fed soybeans and grown under elevated O 3 appeared to be 

### 7

unaffected ( O'Neill et al., 2008 ) . In a meta

- analysis of effects of elevated O 3 on 22 

### 8 species of trees and 10 species of insects, the rates of survival, reproduction and food 

### 9 consumption were t ypically unaffected while development times were reduced and pupal 

### 10

masses were increased ( Valkama et al., 2007 )

. 

### 11

At the Aspen FACE site insect performance under elevated (50

- 60 ppb) O 3 conditions 

### 12 (approximately 1.5 × background ambient levels of 30

- 40 ppb O 3 ) have been considered 

### 13 for several species. Cumulative fecundity of aph ids ( Cepegillettea betulaefoliae) , that 

### 14

were reared on O 3 - exposed paper birch ( Betula papyrifera ) trees, was lower than aphids 

### 15 from control plots ( Awmack et al., 2004 ) . No effects on growth, development, adult 

### 16 weight, embryo number and birth weight of newborn nymphs were observed. In a study 

### 17

conducte d using three aspen genotypes, performance of the aspen beetle ( Chrysomela 

### 18

crochi ) decreased across all parameters measured (development time, adult mass and 

### 19 survivorship) under elevated O 3 ( Vigue and Lindroth, 2010 ) . There was an increase in the 

### 20 development time of male and female aspen beetle larvae a lthough the percentages varied 

### 21 across genotypes. Decreased beetle adult mass and survivorship was observed across all 

### 22 genotypes under elevated O 3 conditions. Another study from the Aspen FACE site did 

### 23 not find any significa nt effects of elevated O 3 on perf ormance (longevity, fecundity, 

### 24
abundance) of the invasive weevil ( Polydrusus sericeus ) ( Hillstrom et al., 2010b )

. 

### 25

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, several studies have considered the effect of elevated O 3 on 

### 26 feeding behavior of insects. In a feeding preference study, the common leaf weevil 

### 27
( Phyllobius pyri ) consumed significa ntly more leaf discs from one aspen clone when 

### 28 compared to a second clone under ambient air conditions ( Freiwald et al., 2008 ) . In a 

### 29 moderately elevated O 3 environment (1.5 × ambient), this preference for a certain aspen 

### 30
clone was less evident, however, leaves from O 3 - exposed trees were significa ntly 

### 31 preferred to leaves grown under ambient conditions. Soybeans grown under enriched O 3 

### 32

had significa ntly less loss of leaf tissue to herbivory in August compared to earlier in the 

### 33 growing season (July) when herbivory was not affected ( Hamilton et al., 2005 ) . Other 

### 34 plant

- herbivore interactions have shown no effects of elevated O 3 on feeding. Feeding 

### 35 behavior of Japanese beetles ( P. japonica ) appeared to be unc hanged when beetles were 

### 36 fed soybean leaves grown under elevated O 3 conditions ( O'Neill et al., 2008 ) . At the 

### 37 Aspen FACE site, feeding by the invasive weevil ( Polydrusus sericeus ), as measured by 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 99 June 2012 leaf area con sumption, was not significa ntly different between foliage that was grown 

### 1

under elevated O 3 versus ambient conditions ( Hillstrom et al., 2010b )

. 

### 2

Population

- level and community

- level responses

Recent data on insects provide evidence of population

- level and community

- level 

### 3
responses to O 3 . Elevated levels of O 3 can affect plant phytochemistry and nutrient 

### 4 content which in turn can alter population density and structure of the associated 

### 5 herbivorous insect communities and impact ecosyst em processes ( Cornelissen, 2011 ; 

### 6
Lindroth, 2010 ) . In 72

- hour exposures to elevated O 3 , mean relative growth rate of the 

### 7 aphid Diuraphis noxia increased with O 3 concentration suggesting that more rapid 

### 8 population growth may occur when atmospheric O 3 is elevated ( Summers et al., 1994 ) . In 

### 9 a long

- term study of elevated O 3 on her bivore performance at the Aspen FACE site, 

### 10 individual performance and population

- level effects of the aphid C. betulaefoliae were 

### 11

assessed. Elevated O 3 levels had a strong positive effect on the population growth rates of 

### 12 the aphids; although effects were not detected by measuring growth, development, adult 

### 13 weight, embryo number or birth weight of newborn nymphs ( Awmack et al., 2004 )

. 

### 14 Conversely, a lower rate of population growth was observed in aphids previously 

### 15 exposed to O 3 in an OTC ( Menendez et al., 2010 ) . No direct effects of O 3 were observed; 

### 16 however, nymphs born from adults exposed to and feeding on O 3 exposed plants were 

### 17 less capable of infesting new plants when compared to nymphs in the control plots 

### 18
( Menendez et al., 2010 ) . Elevated O 3 reduced total arthropod ab undance by 17% at 

### 19 Aspen FACE, largely as a result of the negative effects on parasitoids, although phloem



### 20 feeding insects may benefit ( Hillstrom and Lindroth, 2008 ) . Herbivore communities 

### 21 affected by O 3 and N were sampled along an air pollution gradient in the Los Angeles 

### 22

basin ( Jones and Paine, 2006 ) . Abundance, diversity, and richness of herbivores were not 

### 23 affected. However, a shift in community structure, from phloem

- feeding to chewing 

### 24

dominated communitie s, was observed along the gradient. No consistent effect of 

### 25

elevated O 3 on herbivory or insect population size was detected at SoyFACE ( O'Neill et 

### 26
al., 2010 ; Dermody et al., 2008 )

. 

### 27

Evidence of modification of insect populations and communities in response to elevated 

### 28

O 3 includes genotypic and phenotypic changes. In a study conducted at the Aspen FACE 

### 29

site , elevated O 3 altered the genotype frequencies of the pea aphid ( Acyrthosiphon pisum ) 

### 30 grown on red clover ( Trifolium pratense ) over multiple generations ( Mondor et al., 

### 31

2005 ) . Aphid color was used to distinguish between the two genotypes. Ozone increased 

### 32 the genotypic frequencies of pink

- morph:green

- morph aphids from 2:1 to 9:1, and 

### 33 depressed wing

- induction responses more strongly in the pink than the green genotype 

### 34
( Mondor et al., 2005 ) . Growth and development of individual green and pink aphids 

### 35 reared as a single genotype or mixed genotypes were unaffected by elevated O 3 ( Mondor 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 100 June 2012 et al., 2010 ) . However, growth of pea aphid populations is not readily predictable usin g 

### 1 individual growth rates. 

### 2

9.4.9.2 Wildlife

Herpetofauna

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, direct effects of O 3 exposure including physiological changes 

### 3 and alterations of ecologically important behaviors such as feeding and thermoregulation 

### 4

have been observed in wildlife. These studies have been conducted in limited laboratory 

### 5 exposures, and the levels of O 3 treatment (e.g., 0.2

- 0.8 ppm) were often unrealistically 

### 6 higher than the ambient levels. Amphibians may be especially vulnerable to airborne 

### 7

oxidants due to the signif ica nt gas exchange that occurs across the skin ( Andrews et al., 

### 8

2008 ; Dohm et al., 2008 ) . Exposure to 0.2 ppm to 0.8 pp m O 3 for 4 hours resulted in a 

### 9 decrease of oxygen consumption and depressed lung ventilation in the California tree 

### 10 frog Pseudacris cadaverina ( Mautz and Dohm, 2004 ) . Following a single 4

- h inhalation 

### 11
exposure to 0.8 ppm O 3 , reduced pulmonary macrophage phagocytosis was observed at 1 

### 12

and 24 hours postexposure in the marine toad ( Bufo marinus ) indicating an effect on 

### 13 immune system function ( Dohm et al., 2005 ) . There was no difference in macrophage 

### 14

function at 48 hours postexposure in exposed and control individuals. 

### 15

Behavioral effects of O 3 observed in amphibians include response s to minimize the 

### 16 surface area of the body exposed to the air and a decrease in feeding rates ( Dohm et al., 

### 17

2008 ; Mautz and Dohm, 2004 ) . The adoption of a low

- profile “water conservation 

### 18 posture” during O 3 exposure was observed in experiments with the California tree frog 

### 19
( Mautz and Dohm, 2004 ) . Marine t oads, Bufo marinus , exposed to 0.06 μL/L O 3 for 

### 20

4 hours ate significa ntly fewer mealworms at 1 hour and 48 hours postexposure than 

### 21

control toads ( Dohm et al., 2008 ) . In the same study, escape/exploratory behavior as 

### 22 measured by total distance moved was not negative ly affected in the O 3 - exposed 

### 23 individuals as comp ared to the controls ( Dohm et al., 2008 )

. 

### 24

Water balance a nd thermal preference in herpetofauna are altered with elevated O 3
. 

### 25 Marine toads exposed to 0.8 ppm O 3 for 4 hours exhibited behavioral hypothermia when 

### 26 temperature selection in the toads was assessed at 1, 24 and 48 hours postexposure 

### 27
( Dohm et al., 2001 ) . O zone

- exposed individuals lost almost 5g more body mass on 

### 28 average than controls due to evaporative water loss. At 24 hours after exposure, the 

### 29

individuals that had lost significa nt body mass selected lower body temperatures ( Dohm 

### 30
et al., 2001 ) . Behavioral hy pothermia was also observed in reptiles following 4

- h 

### 31
exposures to 0.6 ppm O 3 . Exposure of the Western Fence Lizard ( Sceloporus 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 101 June 2012 occidentalis ) at 25 o C induced behavioral hypothermia that recovered to control 

### 1 temperatures by 24 hours ( Mautz and Dohm, 2004 ) . The behavioral hypothermic 

### 2 response persisted in lizards exposed to O 3 at 35 o C at 24 hours postexposure resulting in a 

### 3 mean body temperature of 3.3 o C over controls. 

### 4

Soil fauna communities

Ozone has also been shown to alter soil fauna communities ( Meehan et al., 2010 ; 

### 5
Kasurinen et al., 2007 ; Loranger et al., 2004 ) . Abundance of Acari (mites and ticks) 

### 6 decreased by 47% under elevated O 3 at Aspen FACE site, probably due to the higher 

### 7 secondary metabolites and lower N concentrations in litter and foliage under elevated O 3 

### 8
( Loranger et al., 2004 ) . In another study from the Aspen FACE site, leaf litter collected 

### 9 from aspen grown under elevated O 3 conditions was higher in fiber and lignin 

### 10 concentrations than litter from trees grown under ambient conditions. These chemical 

### 11 characteristics of the leaves were associated with increased springtail population growth 

### 12

foll owing 10 weeks in a laboratory microcosm ( Meehan et al., 2010 )

. Consumption rates 

### 13

of earthworms fed on leaf litter for 6 weeks from trees grown under elevated O 3 

### 14 conditions and ambient air did not vary significa ntly between treatments ( Meehan et al., 

### 15

2010 ) . In another study on juvenile earthworms Lumbricus terrestris , individual growth 

### 16 was reduced when worms were fed high

- O 3 birch litte r from trees exposed for three years 

### 17

to elevated O 3 in an OTC system ( Kasurinen et al., 2007 ) . In the same study no 

### 18 significa nt growth or mortality effects were observed in isopods. 

### 19

9.4.9.3 Indirect Effects on Wildlife

In addition to the direct effects of O 3 exposure on phy siological and behavioral endpoints 

### 20 observed in the laboratory, there are indirect effects to wildlife. These effects include 

### 21 changes in biomass and nutritive quality of O 3 - exposed plants (reviewed in Section 9.4 .4 ) 

### 22 that are consumed by wildlife. Reduced digestibility of O 3 - exposed plants may alter 

### 23 dietary intake and foraging strategies in herbivores. In a study using native highbush 

### 24 blackberry ( Rubus argutus ) relative feed value of the plants decreased in bushes exposed 

### 25

to double ambient concentrations of O 3 ( Ditchkoff et al., 2009 ) . Indirect effects of 

### 26

elevated O 3 on wildlife in clude changes in chemical signaling important in ecological 

### 27

interactions reviewed below. 

### 28

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 102 June 2012 Chemical signaling in ecological interactions

Ozone has been shown to degrade or alter biogenic VOC signals important to ecological 

### 1 interactions including; (1) attraction of pollinators and seed dispersers; (2) defense 

### 2 against herbivory; and (3) predator

- prey interactions ( Pinto et al., 2010 ; McFrederick et 

### 3
al., 2009 ; Yuan et al., 2009 ; Pinto et al., 2007a ; Pinto et al., 2007b ) . Each signal released 

### 4 by emitters has an atmospheric lifetime and a unique chemical signature comprised of 

### 5 different ratios of individual hydrocarbons that are s usceptible to atmospheric oxidants 

### 6

such as O 3 ( Yuan et al., 2009 ; Wright e t al., 2005 )

. Under elevated O 3 conditions, these 

### 7 olfactory cues may travel shorter distances before losing their specificity ( McFrederick et 

### 8
al., 2009 ; McFrederick et al., 2008 ) . Additional non

- phytogenic VOC

- mediated 

### 9 interrelationships with the potential to be modifi ed by O 3 include territorial marking, 

### 10 pheromones for attraction of mates and various social interactions including scent trails, 

### 11 nestmate recognition and signals involved in aggregation behaviors ( McFrederick et al., 

### 12

2009 ) . For example, the alcohols, ketones and aldehydes comprising sex pheromones in 

### 13 moths could be especially vulnerable to degradation by O 3 , since some males travel >100 

### 14

mete rs to find mates ( Carde and Haynes, 2004 ) . In general, effects of O 3 on scent



### 15 mediated ecological interactions are highly context

- and species

- specific ( Lindroth, 2010 ; 

### 16

Bidart

- Bouzat and Imeh

- Nathaniel, 2008 )

. 

### 17

Pollination and seed dispersal

Phytogenic VOC’s attract pollinators and seed dispersers to flowers and fruits ( Dudareva 

### 18
et al., 2006 ; Theis and Raguso, 2005 ) . These floral scent trails in plant

- insect interactions 

### 19 may be destroyed or transformed by O 3 ( McFrederick et al., 2008 ) . Using a Lagrangian 

### 20 model, the rate of destruction of phytogenic VOC’s was estimated in air parce ls at 

### 21 increasing distance from a source in response to increased regional levels of O 3 , hydroxyl 

### 22

and nitrate radicals ( McFrederick et al., 2008 )

. Based on the model, the ability of 

### 23 pollinators to locate highly reactive VOCs from emitting flowers may have decreased 

### 24 from kilometers during pre

- industrial times to <200 meters at current ambient conditions 

### 25
( McFrederick et al., 2008 ) . Scents that travel shorter distances (0

- 10 m) are less 

### 26 susceptible to air pollutants, while highly reactive scents that travel longer distances (10 

### 27

to 100’s of meters ), are at a higher risk for degradation ( McFrederick et al., 2009 ) . For 

### 28 example, male euglossine bees can detect bait stations from a distance of at least one 

### 29

kilometer ( Dobson, 1994 )

. 

### 30

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 103 June 2012 Defense against herbivory

Ozone can alter the chemical signature of VOCs emitted by plants and these VOCs are 

### 1 subsequently detected by herbivores ( Blande et al., 2010 ; Iriti and Faoro, 2009 ; Pinto et 

### 2
al., 2007a ; Vuorinen et al., 2004 ; Jackson et al., 1999 ; Cannon, 1990 ) . These 

### 3 modifications can make the plant either more attractive or repellant to phytophagous 

### 4

insects ( Pinto et al., 2010 ) . For example, under elevated O 3 , the host plant preference by 

### 5 forest tent caterpillars increased for birch compared to aspen ( Agrell et al., 2005 )

. 

### 6

Ozone

- induced emissions from red spruce needles were found to repel spruce budworm 

### 7

larvae ( Cannon, 1990 ) . Transcriptional profiles of field grown soybean ( Glycine max ) 

### 8 grown in elevated O 3 conditions were altered due to herbivory by Japanese beetles. The 

### 9 herbivory res ulted in a higher number of transcripts in the leaves of O 3 - exposed plants 

### 10

and upregulat ion of antioxidant metabolism associated with plant defense ( Casteel et al., 

### 11

2008 )

. 

### 12

Ozone may mod ify signals involved in plant

- to

- plant interactions and plant defense 

### 13 against pathogens ( Blande et al., 2010 ; Pinto et al., 2010 ; McFrederick et al., 2009 ; Yuan 

### 14
et al., 2009 ) . In a recent study with lima beans, 80 ppb O 3 degraded several 

### 15

herbivore

- induced VOCs, reducing the distance over which plant

- to

- plant signaling 

### 16

occurred ( Blande et al., 2010 )

. 

### 17

Predator

- prey interactions

Elevated O 3 conditions are associated with disruption of pheromone

- mediated 

### 18 interactions at higher trophic levels (e.g., predators and parasitoids of herbivores). In a 

### 19 study from the Aspen FACE site, predator escape behaviors of the aphid ( Chatophorus 

### 20

stevensis ) were enhanced on O 3 - fumigated aspen trees although the mechanism of this 

### 21 response remains unknown ( Mondor et al., 2004 ) . The predatory mite Phytoseiulus 

### 22
persimilis can distinguish between the VOC signature of ozonated lima bean plants and 

### 23 ozonated lima bean plants simultaneously damaged b y T. urticae ( Vuorinen et al., 2004 ) 

### 24 however, other tritrophic interactions have shown no effect ( Pinto et al., 2007b )

. 

### 25

There are few studies that consider host location behavior s of parasites under elevated O 3
. 

### 26 In closed chambers fumigated with O 3 , the searching efficiency and proportion of the 

### 27 host larval fruit flies parasitized by Asobara tabida declined when compared to filtered 

### 28

air controls ( Gate et al., 1995 ) . The host location behavior and rate of parasitism of the 

### 29
wasp ( Coesia plutellae ) on Plutella xylostella

- infested potted cabbage plants was tested 

### 30

under ambient and doubled O 3 conditions in an open

- air fumigation system ( Pinto et al., 

### 31

2008 ) . The number of wasps found in the field and the percentages of parasitized larvae 

### 32

were not significa ntly different from controls under elevated O 3
. 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 104 June 2012 Elevated O 3 has the potential to perturb specialized food

- web communication in 

### 1 transgenic crops. In insect

- resistant oilseed rape Brassica napus grown under 100 ppb O 3 

### 2 in a growth chamber, reduced feeding damage by Putella xylostella led to deceased 

### 3

attraction of the end oparasitoid ( Costesia vestalis ), however this tritrophic interaction 

### 4 was influenced by the degree of herbivore feeding ( Himanen et al., 2009a ; Himanen et 

### 5
al., 2009b ) . Under chronic O 3 - exposure, the insect resistance trait BT cry1Ac in 

### 6 transgenic B. napus was higher than the control ( Hima nen et al., 2009c ) . There was a 

### 7 negative relative growth rate of the Bt target herbivore, P. xylostella , in all O 3 treatments. 

### 8

9.4.9.4 Summary

Recent information on O 3 effects on insects and other wildlife is limited to a few species 

### 9

and there is no consensus on how these organisms respond to elevated O 3. Studies 

### 10 published since the last review show impacts of elevated O 3 on both species

- level 

### 11 responses (reproduction, growth, feeding behavior) and community and ecosystem

- level 

### 12 responses (population growth, abun dance, shift in community structure) in some insects 

### 13 and soil fauna. Changes in ecologically important behaviors such as feeding and 

### 14 thermoregulation have recently been observed with O 3 exposure in amphibians and 

### 15 reptiles, however, these responses occur at concentrations of O 3 much higher than 

### 16

ambient levels. 

### 17

Recent information available since the last review considers the effects of O 3 on chemical 

### 18 signaling in insect and wildlife interactions. Specifically, studies on O 3 effects on 

### 19 pollination and seed dis persal, defenses against herbivory and predator

- prey interactions 

### 20 all consider the ability of O 3 to alter the chemical signature of VOCs emitted during these 

### 21 pheromone

- mediated events. The effects of O 3 on chemical signaling between plants, 

### 22

herbivores and pollinators as well as interactions between multiple trophic levels is an 

### 23 emerging area of study that may result in further elucidation of O 3 effects at the species, 

### 24 community and ecosystem

- level. 

### 25



## 9.5 Effects

- Based Air Quality Exposure Indices and Dose Modeli ng

9.5.1 Introduction

Exposure indices are metrics that quantify exposure as it relates to measured plant 

### 26 damage (e.g., reduced growth). They are summary measures of monitored ambient O 3 

### 27

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 105 June 2012 concentrations over time, intended to provide a consistent metric for revie wing and 

### 1 comparing exposure

- response effects obtained from various studies. Such indices may 

### 2 also provide a basis for developing a biologically

- relevant air quality standard for 

### 3 protecting vegetation and ecosystems. Effects on plant growth and/or yield hav e been a 

### 4 major focus of the characterization of O 3 impacts on plants for purposes of the air quality 

### 5 standard setting process ( U.S. EPA, 2007b

, 1996e

, 1986 ) . The relationship of O 3 and 

### 6 plant responses can be characterized quantitatively as “dose

- response” or “exposure



### 7 response.” The distinction is in how the pollutant concentration is express ed: “dose” is 

### 8 the pollutant concentration absorbed by the leaf over some time period, and is very 

### 9 difficult to measure directly, whereas “exposure” is the ambient air concentration 

### 10 measured near the plant over some time period, and summarized for that peri od using an 

### 11 index. Exposure indices have been most useful in considering the form of the secondary 

### 12

O 3 NAAQS, in large part because they only require ambient air quality data rather than 

### 13 more complex indirect calculations of dose to the plant. The attribute s of exposure 

### 14 indices that are most relevant to plant damage are the weighting of O 3 concentrations and 

### 15 the daily and seasonal time

- periods. Several different types of exposure indices are 

### 16

discussed in Section 9.5.2

. 

### 17

From a theoretical perspective, a measure of plant O 3 uptake or dose from ambient air 

### 18 (either rate of uptake or cumulative seasonal uptake) might be a better predictor of O 3 

### 19 damage to plants than an exposure index and may be useful in improving risk assessment. 

### 20 An uptake estimate would have to integrate all those environmental factors that influence 

### 21 stomatal conductance, including but not limited to temperature, humidity, and soil water 

### 22
status (Section 9.5.4 ). Therefore, uptake values are generally obtained with simulation 

### 23 models that require knowledge of species

- and site

- specific values for the variables 

### 24 mentioned. However, a limitation of modeling dose is that environmental variables are 

### 25 poorly characterized. In addition, it has also been recognized that O 3 detoxification 

### 26 processes and the temporal dynamics of detoxification must be taken into account in dose 

### 27 modeling ( Heath et al., 2009 ) (Section 9.5.4 ). Because of this, research has focused 

### 28 historically on predictors of O 3 damage to plants based only on exposure as a summary 

### 29 measure of monitored ambient pollutant concentration over some integral of time, rather 

### 30

than dose ( U.S. EPA, 1996c ; Costa et al., 1992 ; Lee et al., 1988b ; U.S. EPA, 1986 ; 

### 31
Lefohn and Benedict, 1982 ; O'Gara, 1922 )

. 

### 32

9.5.2 Description of Exposure Indices Available in the Literature

Mathematical approaches for summarizing ambient air quality information in biologically 

### 33 meaningful forms for O 3 vegetation effects assessment purposes have been explored for 

### 34

more than 80 years ( U.S. EPA, 1996b ; O'Gara, 1922 ) . In the context of national standards 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 106 June 2012 that protect for “known or anticipated” effects on many plant species in a variety of 

### 1

habi tats, exposure indices provide a numerical summary of very large numbers of 

### 2 ambient observations of concentration over extended periods. Like any summary statistic, 

### 3 exposure indices retain information on some, but not all, characteristics of the original 

### 4

o bservations. Several indices have been developed to attempt to incorporate some of the 

### 5 biological, environmental, and exposure factors that influence the magnitude of the 

### 6 biological response and contribute to observed variability ( Hogsett et al., 1988 ) . In the 

### 7

1996 O 3 AQCD, the exposure indices were ar ranged into five categories; (1) One event, 

### 8 (2) Mean, (3) Cumulative, (4) Concentration weighted, and (5) Multicomponent, and 

### 9

were discussed in detail ( Lee et al., 1989 )

. Figure 9

- 9 illustrates how several of the 

### 10 indices weight conce ntration and accumulate exposure. For example, the SUM06 index 

### 11 (panel a) is a threshold

- based approach wherein concentrations below 0.06 ppm are given 

### 12 a weight of zero and concentrations at or above 0.06 ppm are given a weight of 1.0 that is 

### 13
summed, usuall y over 3 to 6 months. The Sigmoid approach (panel b), which is similar to 

### 14

the W126 index ( Lefohn et al., 1988 ; Lefohn and Runeckles, 1987 ) , is a non

- threshold 

### 15 approach wherein all concentrations are given a weight tha t increases from zero to 1.0 

### 16 with increasing concentration and summed. 

### 17

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 107 June 2012 (a) SUM06: the upper graphic illustrates an episodic exposure profile; the shaded area under some of the peaks illustrates th e concentrations greater than or equal to 0.06 ppm that a re accumulated in the index. The insert shows the concentration weighting (0 or 1) function. The lower portion of the graphic illustrates how concentration is accumulated over the exposure period. (b) S IGMOID: the upper graphic illustrates an episodic expo sure profile; the variable shaded area under the peaks illustrates the concentration

dependent weights that are accumulated in the index. The insert shows the sigmoid concentration weighting function. This is s imilar to the W126 function. The lower portion of the graphic illustrates how concentration is accumulated over the exposure period. (c) second HDM and M

- 7: the upper graphic illustrates an episodic exposure profile. The lower portion of the graphic illustrates that the second HDM considers only a sin gle exposure peak, while the M

- 7 (average of 7

- h daily means) applies a constant exposure value over the exposure period. Source: Reprinted with permission of Air and Waste Management Association ( Tingey et al., 1991 )

.



### Figure 9

- 9 Diagrammatic representation of several exposure indices illustrating how they weight concentration and accumulate
exposure.

This section will primarily discuss SUM06, W126 and AOTx exposure metrics. Below 

### 1

are the definitions of the three cumulative index forms: 

### 2

 SUM06: Sum of all hourly O 3 concentrations greater than or equal to 

### 3

0.06 ppm observed during a specified daily and seasonal time window 

### 4
( Figure 9

- 9 a ). 

### 5

 AOTx: Sum of the differences between hourly O 3 concentrations greater than 

### 6 a specified thres hold during a specified daily and seasonal time window. For 

### 7 example, AOT40 is sum of the differences between hourly concentarions 

### 8

above 0.04 ppm. 

### 9

 W126: Sigmoidally weighted sum of all hourly O 3 concentrations observed 

### 10 during a specified daily and seasonal time window ( Lefohn et al., 1988 ; 

### 11
Lefohn and Runeckles, 1987 ) , similar to Figure 9

- 9 b ). The sigmoidal 

### 12

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 108 June 2012 weighting of hourly O 3 concentration is given in the equation below, where C 

### 1 is the hourly O 3 concentration in ppm: 

### 2

Equation 9

- 1

These indices have a variety of relevant time windows that may be applied and are 

### 3

discussed in Section 9.5.3

. 

### 4

Various factors with known or suspected bearing on the exposure

- response relationship, 

### 5 including concentration, time of day, respite time, frequency of peak occurrence, plant 

### 6 phenology, predisposition, etc., have been weighted with various functions in a l arge set 

### 7 of indices. The resulting indices were evaluated by ranking them according to the 

### 8 goodness

- of

- fit of a regression model of growth or yield response ( Lee et al., 1989 ) . The 

### 9 statistical evaluations for each of these indices were completed using growth or yield 

### 10 response data from many earlier exposure studies (e.g., NCLAN). This re trospective 

### 11 approach was necessary because there were no studies specifically designed to test the 

### 12 goodness

- of

- fit of the various indices. The goodness

- of

- fit of a set of linear and nonlinear 

### 13 models for exposure

- response was ranked as various proposed indi ces were used in turn 

### 14 to quantify exposure. This approach provided evidence for the best indices. The results of 

### 15 retrospective analyses are described below. 

### 16

Most of the early retrospective studies reporting regression approaches used data from the 

### 17
NCLAN pr ogram or data from Corvallis, Oregon or California ( Costa et al., 1992 ; Lee et 

### 18
al., 1988b ; Lefohn et al., 1988 ; Musselman et al., 1988 ; Lee et al., 1987 ; U.S. EPA, 

### 19

1986 ) . These st udies were previously reviewed by the EPA ( U.S. EPA, 1996c ; Costa et 

### 20
al., 1992 ) and were in general agreement that the best fit to the data resulted from using 

### 21

cumulative concentration

- weighted exposure indices (e.g., W126, SUM06). Lee et al. 

### 22
(1987 ) suggested that exposure indices that included all the 24

- h data performed better 

### 23 than those that used only 7 hours of data; this was consistent with the conclusions of 

### 24 Heagle et al. (1987 ) that plants receiving exposures for an additional 5

- h/day showed 

### 25 10% greater yield loss than those exposed for 7

- h/day. In an analysis using the National 

### 26 Crop Loss Assessment Network (NCLAN) data, Lefohn et al. (1988 ) found several 

### 27 indices which only cumulated and weighted highe r concentrations (e.g., W126, SUM06, 

### 28 SUM08, and AOT40) performed very well. Amongst this group no index had 

### 29 consistently better fits than the other indices across all studies and species ( Heagl e et al., 

### 30

1994b ; Lefohn et al., 1988 ; Musselman et al., 1988 )

. Lefohn et al. (1988 ) found that 

### 31 adding phenology weighting to the index somewhat improved the performance of the 

### 32 C c 

## e w 126 

## 4403 1 1

−



## + =

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 109 June 2012 indices. The “best” exposure index was a phen ologically weighted cumulative index, 

### 1 with sigmoid weighting on concentration and a gamma weighting function as a surrogate 

### 2 for plant growth stage. This index provided the best statistical fit when used in the models 

### 3 under consideration, but it required da ta on species and site conditions, making 

### 4 specification of weighting functions difficult for general use. 

### 5

Other factors, including predisposition time ( Hogsett et al., 1988 ; McCool et al., 1988 ) 

### 6 and crop development stage ( Tingey et al., 2002 ; Heagle et al., 1991 ) contributed to 

### 7 variation in the biological response and suggested the need for weighting O 3 

### 8

concentrations to account for predisposition time and phenology. However, the roles of 

### 9 predisposition and phenology in plant response vary considerably with species and 

### 10 environmental conditions; therefore, specification of a weighting function for general use 

### 11

in charact erizing plant exposure has not been possible. 

### 12

European scientists took a similar approach in developing indices describing growth and 

### 13 yield loss in crops and tree seedlings, using OTCs with modified ambient exposures, but 

### 14 many fewer species and study locat ions were employed in the European studies. There is 

### 15 evidence from some European studies that a lower ( Pleijel et al., 1997 ) or higher ( Finnan 

### 16
et al., 1997 ; Finnan et al., 1996 ) cutoff value in indices with a threshold may provide a 

### 17 better statistical fit to the experimental data. Finnan et al. (1997 ) used seven expos ure 

### 18 studies of spring wheat to confirm that cumulative exposure indices emphasizing higher 

### 19

O 3 concentrations were best related to plant response and that cumulative exposure 

### 20 indices using weighting functions, including cutoff concentrations, allometric and 

### 21 sigmoidal, provided a better fit and that the ranking of these indices differed depending 

### 22 on the exposure

- response model used. Weighting those concentrations associated with 

### 23 sunshine hours in an attempt to incorporate an element of plant uptake did not im prove 

### 24 the index performance ( Finnan et al., 1997 ) . A more recent study using data from several 

### 25 European studie s of Norway spruce, analyzed the relationship between relative biomass 

### 26 accumulation and several cumulative, weighted indices, including the AOT40 (area over 

### 27 a threshold of 40ppb) and the SUM06 ( Skarby et al., 2004 ) . All the indices performed 

### 28 relatively well in regressing biomass and exposure index, with the AOT20 and AOT30 

### 29 doing slightly better than others (r 2
= 0.46

- 0.47). In another comparative study of four 

### 30 independent data sets of potato y ield and different cumulative uptake indices with 

### 31 different cutoff values, a similarly narrow range of r 2 was observed (r 2
= 0.3

- 0.4) ( Pleijel 

### 32
et al., 2004b )

. 

### 33

In Europe, the cutoff concentration

- weighted index AOT40 was selected in developing 

### 34

exposure

- response relationships based on OTC studies of a l imited number of crops and 

### 35

trees ( Grunhage and Jager, 2003 ) . The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 

### 36
( UNECE, 1988 ) adopted the critical levels approach for assessment of O 3 risk to 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 110 June 2012 vegetation across Europe. As used by the UNECE, the critical levels are not like the air 

### 1 quality regulatory standards used in the U.S., but rather function as planning targets for 

### 2 reductions in pollutant emissions to protect ecological resources. Critical levels for O 3 are 

### 3

intende d to prevent long

- term deleterious effects on the most sensitive plant species 

### 4 under the most sensitive environmental conditions, but not intended to quantify O 3 

### 5 effects. A critical level was defined as “the concentration of pollutant in the atmosphere 

### 6

abo ve which direct adverse effects on receptors, such as plants, ecosystems, or materials 

### 7 may occur according to present knowledge” ( UNECE, 1988 ) . The nature of the “adverse 

### 8 effects” was not specified in the original definition, which provided for different levels 

### 9 for different types of harmful effect (e.g., visible injury or loss of crop yield). There are 

### 10 also different critical levels for crops, forests, and semi

- natural vegetation. The caveat, 

### 11 “according to present knowledge” is important because critical levels are not rigid; they 

### 12 are revised periodically as new scientific information becomes available. For example, 

### 13 the original critical level for O 3 specified concentrations for three averaging times, but 

### 14

further research and debate led to the cu rrent critical level being stated as the cumulative 

### 15 exposure (concentration × hours) over a cutoff concentration of 40 ppb (AOT40) ( Fuhrer 

### 16
et al., 1997 )

. 

### 17

More rece ntly in Europe, a decision was made to work towards a flux

- based approach 

### 18
(see Section 9.5.4 ) for the critical levels (“Level II”), with the goal of modeling O 3 

### 19

flux

- effect relationships for three vegetation types: crops, forests, and semi

- natural 

### 20 vegetation ( Grunhage and Jager, 2003 ) . Progress has been made in modeling flux ( U.S. 

### 21
EPA, 2006b ) and the Mapping Manual is being revised ( Ashmore et al., 2004a

, b ; 

### 22
Grennfelt, 2004 ; Karlsson et al., 2003 ) . The revisions may include a flux

- based approach 

### 23 for three crops: wheat, potatoes, and cotton. However, because of a lack of flux

- response 

### 24
data, a cumulative, cutoff concentration

- based (AOTx) exposure index will r emain in use 

### 25 for the near future for most crops and for forests and semi

- natural herbaceous vegetation 

### 26
( Ashmore et al., 2004b )

. 

### 27

In both the U.S. and Europe, the adequacy of these numerical summaries of exposure in 

### 28 relating biomass and yield changes have, f or the most part, all been evaluated using data 

### 29 from studies not necessarily designed to compare one index to another ( Skarby et al., 

### 30

2004 ; Lee et al., 1989 ; Lefohn et al., 1988 ) . Very few studies in the U.S. have addressed 

### 31

this issue since the 2006 O 3 AQCD. McLaughlin et al. (2007a ) reported that the 

### 32 cumulative exposure index of AOT60 related well to reductions in growth rates at forest 

### 33 sites in the southern Appalachian Mountains. However, the authors did not report an 

### 34 analysis to compare multiple indices. Overall, given the available data from previous O 3 

### 35
AQCDs and the few recent studies, the cumulative, concentration

- weighted indices 

### 36 perform better than the peak or mean indices. It is still not possible, however, to 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 111 June 2012 distinguish t he differences in performance among the cumulative, concentration

- weighted 

### 1

indices. 

### 2

The main conclusions from the 1996 and 2006 O 3 AQCDs regarding an index based on 

### 3 ambient exposure are still valid. No information has come forth since the 2006 O 3 AQCD 

### 4

to alter those conclusions. These key conclusions can be restated as follows: 

### 5

 O 3 effects in plants are cumulative; 

### 6

 higher O 3 concentrations appear to be more important than lower 

### 7 concentrations in eliciting a response; 

### 8

 plant sensitivity to O 3 varies with time of day and plant development stage; 

### 9

and 

### 10

 quantifying exposure with indices that accumulate the O 3 hourly 

### 11 concentrations and preferentially weight the higher concentrations improves 

### 12 the explanatory power of exposure/response models for growth and yield, ove r 

### 13 using indices based on mean and peak exposure values. 

### 14

Following the 2006 criteria review process ( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) , the EPA proposed an 

### 15 alternative form of the secondary NAAQS for O 3 using a cumulative, concentration



### 16 weighted exposure index to protect vegetation from damage (72 FR 37818). The EPA 

### 17

conside red two specific concentration

- weighted indices: the cutoff concentration 

### 18 weighted SUM06 and the sigmoid

- weighted W126 exposure index ( U.S. EPA, 2007b )

. 

### 19 These two indices performed equally well in predicting the exposure

- response 

### 20

r elationships observed in the crop and tree seedlings studies ( Lee et al., 1989 ) . At a 

### 21 workshop convened to consider the science supporting these indices ( Heck and Cowling, 

### 22

1997 ) there was a consensus that these cumul ative concentration

- weighted indices being 

### 23 considered were equally capable of predicting plant response. It should be noted that 

### 24 there are some important differences between the SUM06 and W126. When considering 

### 25 the response of vegetation to O 3 exposures re presented by the threshold (e.g., SUM06) 

### 26

and non

- threshold (e.g., W126) indices, the W126 metric does not have a cut

- off in the 

### 27 weighting scheme as does SUM06 and thus it includes consideration of potentially 

### 28 damaging exposures below 60 ppb. The W126 metri c also adds increasing weight to 

### 29 hourly concentrations from about 40 ppb to about 100 ppb ( Le fohn et al., 1988 ; Lefohn 

### 30
and Runeckles, 1987 ) . This is unlike cut

- off metrics such as the SUM06 where all 

### 31

concentrations above 60 ppb are treated equally. This is an important feature of the W126 

### 32 since as hourly concentrations become higher, they become increasingly likely to 

### 33 overwhelm plant defenses and are known to be more detrimental to vegetation (See 

### 34

Section 9.5.3.1 ). 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 112 June 2012 9.5.3 Important Components of Exposure Indices

In the previous O 3 AQCDs it was established that higher hourly concentrations have 

### 1 greater effects on vegetation than lower concentrations ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996c )

. 

### 2
Further, it was determined that the diur nal and seasonal duration of exposure is important 

### 3 for plant response. Weighting of hourly concentrations and the diurnal and seasonal time 

### 4 window of exposure are the most important variables in a cumulative exposure index and 

### 5

will be discussed below. Howe ver, these variables should be looked at in the context of 

### 6 plant phenology, diurnal conductance rates, plant canopy structure, and detoxification 

### 7 mechanisms of vegetation as well as the climate and meteorology, all of which are 

### 8 determinants of plant respon se. These more specific factors will be discussed in the 

### 9 uptake and dose modeling Section 9.5.4

. 

### 10

9.5.3.1 Role of Concentration

The significa nt role of pea k O 3 concentrations was established based on several 

### 11 experimental studies ( U.S. EPA, 1996c ) . Several studies ( Oksanen and Holopainen, 

### 12

2001 ; Yun and Laurence, 1999 ; Nussbaum et al., 1995 ) have added support for the 

### 13 important role that peak concentrations, as well as the pattern of occurrence, plays in 

### 14 plant response to O 3
. Oksanen and Holopainen (2001 ) found that the peak concentrations 

### 15 and the shape of the O 3 exposure (i.e., duration of the event) were important determinants 

### 16 of foliar injury in European white b irch saplings, but growth reductions were found to be 

### 17 more related to total cumulative exposure. Based on air quality data from 10 U.S. cities, 

### 18

three 4

- week exposure treatments having the same SUM06 value were constructed by 

### 19
Yun and Laurence (1999 ) . The authors used different exposure regimes to explore effects 

### 20

of treatments with variable versus uniform peak occurrence during the exposure period. 

### 21 The authors reported that the variable peak exposures were important in causing injury, 

### 22 and that the different exposure treatments, although having the same SUM06, resulted in 

### 23 very d ifferent patterns of foliar injury. Nussbaum et al. (1995 ) also found peak 

### 24

concentrat ions and the pattern of occurrence to be critical in determining the measured 

### 25 response. The authors recommended that to describe the effect on total forage yield, peak 

### 26

concentrations >0.11 ppm must be emphasized by using an AOT with higher threshold 

### 27

concen trations. 

### 28

A greater role for peak concentrations in effects on plant growth might be inferred based 

### 29 on air quality analyses for the southern California area ( Tingey et al., 2004 ; Lee et al., 

### 30

2003a ) . In the late 1960s and 1970s, extremely high O 3 concentrations had impacted the 

### 31

San Berna rdino National Forest. However, over the past 20+ years, significa nt reductions 

### 32

in O 3 exposure have occurred ( Bytnerowicz et al., 2008 ; Lee et al., 2003a ; Lefohn and 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 113 June 2012 Shadwick, 2000 ; Davidson, 1993 ) . An illustration of this improvement in air quality is 

### 1 shown by the 37

- year history of O 3 air quality at the Crestline site in the San Bernardino 

### 2
Mountains ( Figure 9

- 10 ) ( Lee et al., 2003a ) . Ozone exposure increased from 1 963 to 

### 3 1979 concurrent with increased population and vehicular miles, followed by a decline to 

### 4 the present mirroring decreases in precursor emissions. The pattern in exposure was 

### 5 evident in various exposure indices including the cumulative concentration we ighted 

### 6 (SUM06), as well as maximum peak event (1

- h peak), and the number of days having 

### 7 hourly averaged O 3 concentrations greater than or equal to 95 ppb. The number of days 

### 8 having hourly averaged O 3 concentrations greater than or equal to 95 ppb declined 

### 9 significa ntly from 163 days in 1978 to 103 days in 1997. The changes in ambient O 3 air 

### 10 quality for the Crestline site were reflected in the changes in frequency and magnitude of 

### 11 the peak hourly concentration and the duration of exposure ( Figure 9

- 10 ). Considering 

### 12 the role of exposure patterns in determining response, the seasonal and diurnal patterns in 

### 13 hourly O 3 concentration did not var y appreciably from year to year over the 37

- year 

### 14 period ( Lee et al., 2003a )

. 

### 15

The potential impor tance of exposure to peak concentrations comes both from results of 

### 16 measures of tree conditions on established plots and from results of model simulations. 

### 17 Across a broad area of the San Bernardino National Forest, the Forest Pest Management 

### 18
(FPM) method o f injury assessment indicated an improvement in crown condition from 

### 19 1974 to 1988; and the area of improvement in injury assessment is coincident with an 

### 20 improvement in O 3 air quality ( Miller and Rechel, 1999 ) . A more recent analysis of forest 

### 21 changes in the San Bernardino National Forest, using an expanded network of monitoring 

### 22
sites, has verified significa nt changes in growth, mortality rates, basal area , and species 

### 23 composition throughout the area since 1974 ( Arbaugh et al., 2003 ) . A model simulation 

### 24 of ponderosa pine growth over the 40

- year period in the San Bernardino National Forest 

### 25

showed a significa nt impact of O 3 exposur e on tree growth and indicates improved 

### 26 growth with reduced O 3 concentrations. This area has also experienced elevated 

### 27

N deposition and based on a number of environmental indicators, it appears that this area 

### 28 is experiencing N saturation ( Fenn et al., 1996 ) . To account for this potential interaction, 

### 29

the model simulations were conducted under conditions of unlimited soil N. The ac tual 

### 30 interactions are not known. The improvement in growth over the years was attributed to 

### 31 improved air quality, but no distinction was made regarding the relative role of 

### 32

“ mid

- range ” and higher hourly concentrations, only that improved growth tracked 

### 33

dec reasing SUM06, maximum peak concentration, and number of days of hourly O 3 

### 34

>95 ppb ( Tingey et al., 2004 ) . A summary of air quality data from 1980 to 2000 for the 

### 35

San Bernardino National Forest area of the number of “mid

- range” hourly concentrations 

### 36 indicated no dramatic changes over this 20

- year period, ranging from about 1,500 to 

### 37
2,000 hours per year ( Figure 9

- 11 ). There was a slow increase in the number of 

### 38

“ mid

- range ” concentrations from 1980 to 1986, which corresponds to the period after 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 114 June 2012 implementation of the air quality standard. Another sharper increase was observed in the 

### 1 late 1990s. This pattern of occurrenc e of mid

- range hourly concentrations suggests a 

### 2 lesser role for these concentration ranges compared to the higher values in either of the 

### 3 ground

- level tree injury observations of the model simulation of growth over the 40

- year 

### 4 period. 

### 5

Note: Annual ROG an d NO X emissions data for San Bernardino County were obtained from Alexis et al. (2001a ) and the California Air Resource Board’s emission inventory available a t http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/ds.htm ( Cal EPA, 2010 )

. Source: Reprinted with permission of Elsevier Science Ltd. ( L ee et al., 2003a )

.



### Figure 9

- 10 Trends in May to September : 12

- h our SUM06, Peak 1

- h our ozone concentration and number of daily exceedances of 95 ppb for the Crestline site in 1963 to 1999; in relation to tr ends in mean daily maximum temperature for Crestline and daily reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NO X 

### ) for San Bernardino County.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 115 June 2012 Figure 9

- 11 The number of hourly average concentrations between 50 and 89 ppb for the period 1980

- 2000 for the Crestline, San Bernardino County, CA, monitoring site.

9.5.3.2 Diurnal and Seasonal Exposure

Diurnal Exposure

The diurnal patterns of maximal leaf/needle conductance and occurrence of higher 

### 1

ambient concentrat ions can help determine which hours during the day over a season 

### 2 should be included in an exposure index. Stomatal conductance is species and phenology 

### 3 dependent and is linked to both diurnal and seasonal meteorological activity as well as to 

### 4

soil/site con ditions (e.g., VPD, soil moisture). Daily patterns of leaf/needle conductance 

### 5 are often highest in midmorning, whereas higher ambient O 3 concentrations generally 

### 6 occur in early to late afternoon when stomata are often partially closed and conductances 

### 7

are lower. Total O 3 flux depends on atmospheric and boundary layer resistances, both of 

### 8 which exhibit variability throughout the day. Experi mental studies with tree species 

### 9 demonstrated the decoupling of ambient O 3 exposure, peak occurrence, and gas 

### 10 exchange, particularly in areas of drought ( Panek, 2004 ) . Several studies have suggested 

### 11 that ponderosa pine trees in the southern and northern Sierra Nevada Mountains may not 

### 12 be as susceptible to high O 3 concentrations as to lower concentrations, due to reduced 

### 13

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 116 June 2012 needle conductance and O 3 uptake during the period when the highest concentrations 

### 1

occur ( Panek et al., 2002 ; Panek and Goldstein, 2001 ; Bauer et al., 2000 ; Arbaugh et al., 

### 2

1998 )

. Panek et al. (2002 ) compared direct O 3 flux measurements into a canopy of 

### 3 ponderosa pine and demonstrated a lack of correlation of daily patterns of conductance 

### 4

and O 3 occurrence, especially in the late season drought period; the authors concluded 

### 5 that a consideration of climate or season was essential, especially considering the role of 

### 6

soil moisture and cond uctance/uptake. In contrast, Grulke et al. (2002 ) reported high 

### 7

conductance when O 3 concentra tions were high in the same species, but under different 

### 8 growing site conditions. The longer

- term biological responses reported by Mille r and 

### 9
Rechel (1999 ) for ponderosa pine in the same region, and the general reduction in recent 

### 10 years in ambient O 3 concentrations, suggest that stomatal conductance alone may not be a 

### 11 sufficient indicator of potential vegetation injury or damage. Anothe r consideration for 

### 12

the effect of O 3 uptake is the diurnal pattern of detoxification capacity of the plant. The 

### 13 detoxification capacity may not follow the same pattern as stomatal conductance ( Heath 

### 14
et al., 2009 )

. 

### 15

The use of a 12

- h (8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.) daylight period for a W126 cumulating 

### 16 exposure was based primarily on evidence that the conditions for upta ke of O 3 into the 

### 17 plant occur mainly during the daytime hours. In general, plants have the highest stomatal 

### 18 conductance during the daytime and in many areas atmospheric turbulent mixing is 

### 19 greatest during the day as well ( Uddling et al., 2010 ; U.S. EPA, 2006b ) . However, 

### 20 notable exceptions to maximum daytime conductance are cacti and other plant s with 

### 21 crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM photosynthesis) which only open their stomata at 

### 22 night. This section will focus on plants with C3 and C4 photosynthesis, which generally 

### 23 have maximum stomatal conductance during the daytime. 

### 24

Recent reviews of the li terature reported that a large number of species had varying 

### 25 degrees of nocturnal stomatal conductance ( Caird et al., 2007 ; Dawson et al., 2007 ; 

### 26
Musselman and Minnick, 2000 ) . The reason for night

- time water loss through stomata is 

### 27

not well understood and is an area of active research (e.g., Christman et al., 2009 ; 

### 28
Howard et al., 2009 ) . Night

- time stomatal opening may be enhanced by O 3 damage that 

### 29 could result in loss of stomatal control, and less complete closure of stomata, than under 

### 30

low O 3 conditions ( Caird et al., 2007 ; Grulke et al., 2007b ) . In general, th e rate of 

### 31 stomatal conductance at night is much lower than during the day ( Caird et al., 2007 )

. 

### 32 Atmospheric turbulence at night is also often low, which results in stable boundary layers 

### 33

and unfavorable conditions for O 3 uptake into vegetation ( Finkelstein et al., 2000 )

. 

### 34 Nevertheless, nocturnal turbulence does intermittently occur and may result in 

### 35

non

- negligible O 3 flux into the plants. In addition, plants might be more susceptible to O 3 

### 36 exposure at night than during the daytime, because of potentially lower plant defenses 

### 37
( Heath et al., 2009 ; Loreto and Fares, 2007 ; Musselman et al., 2006 ; Musselman and 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 117 June 2012 Minnick, 2000 ) . For significa nt nocturnal stomatal flux and O 3 effects to occur, specific 

### 1

conditio ns must exist. A susceptible plant with nocturnal stomatal conductance and low 

### 2 defenses must be growing in an area with relatively high night

- time O 3 concentrations 

### 3 and appreciable nocturnal atmospheric turbulence. It is unclear how many areas there are 

### 4

in the U.S. where these conditions occur. It may be possible that these conditions exist in 

### 5
mountainous areas of southern California, front

- range of Colorado ( Turnipseed et al., 

### 6

2009 ) and the Great Smoky Mountains of North Carolina an d Tennessee. Tobiessen 

### 7
(1982 ) found that shade int olerant tree species showed opening of stomata in the dark and 

### 8 did not find this in shade tolerant species. This may indicate shade intolerant trees may be 

### 9 more likely to be susceptible to O 3 exposure at night. More information is needed in 

### 10

locations with high night

- time O 3 to assess the local O 3 patterns, micrometeorology and 

### 11 responses of potentially vulnerable plant species. 

### 12

Several field studies have attempted to quantify night

- time O 3 uptake with a variety of 

### 13 methods. However, many of these studies have not linked the night

- time flux to measured 

### 14 effects on plants. Grulke et al. (2004 ) showed that the stomatal conductance at night for 

### 15 ponderosa pine in the San Bernardino National Forest (CA) ranged from one tenth to one 

### 16

f ourth that of maximum daytime stomatal conductance. In June, at a high

- elevation site, it 

### 17 was calculated that 11% of the total daily O 3 uptake of pole

- sized trees occurred at night. 

### 18
In late summer, however, O 3 uptake at night was negligible. However, this study did not 

### 19 consider the turbulent conditions at night. Finkelstein et al. (2000 ) investigated O 3 

### 20 deposition velocity to forest canopies at three differen t sites. The authors found the total 

### 21
flux (stomatal and non

- stomatal) to the canopy to be very low during night

- time hours as 

### 22 compared to day

- time hours. However, the authors did note that higher nocturnal 

### 23 deposition velocities at conifer sites may be due to some degree of stomatal opening at 

### 24 night ( Finkelstein et al., 2000 ) . Work by Mereu et al. (2009 ) in Italy on Mediterranean 

### 25 species indicated that nocturnal uptake was from 10 to 18% of total daily uptake during a 

### 26 weak drought and up to 24% as the dr ought became more pronounced. The proportion of 

### 27 night

- time uptake was greater during the drought due to decreases in daytime stomatal 

### 28

conductance ( Mereu et al., 2009 ) . In a study conducted in California, ( Fares et al., 2011 ) 

### 29 reported that calculated mean percentages of nocturnal uptake were 5%, 12.5%, 6.9% of 

### 30

total O 3 uptake for lemon, mandarin, and orange, respectively. In another recent study at 

### 31 the Aspen FACE site in Wisco nsin, calculated leaf

- level stomatal O 3 flux was near zero 

### 32 from the night

- time hours of 8:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. ( Uddling et al., 2010 ) . This was likely 

### 33 due to low horizontal wind speed (>1 meter/sec) and low O 3 concentrations (<25 ppb) 

### 34 during those same night

- time hours ( F igure 9

- 12 ). 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 118 June 2012 Note: Subscripts “max” and “min” refer to stomatal fluxes calculated neglecting and accounting for potential non

- stomatal ozone flux, respectively. Source: Reprinted with permission of Elsevier Ltd. ( Uddling et al., 2010 )

.



### Figure 9

- 12 Diurnal (a) conductance through boundary layer and stomata (gbs), (b) ozone concentration, and leaf

- level stomatal ozone flux (Fst0l) in control plots from mid

- June through Augus t in (c) 2004 and (d) 2005 in the Aspen FACE experiment.

A few studies have tested the biological effects of night

- time O 3 exposure on vegetation 

### 1 in controlled chambers. Biomass of ponderosa pine seedlings was significa ntly reduced 

### 2 when seedlings were expo sed to either daytime or nighttime episodic profiles ( Lee and 

### 3
Hogsett, 1999 ) . However, the biomass reductions were much greater with daytime peak 

### 4 concentrations than with nighttime peak concentrations. Similarly, birch cuttings grown 

### 5 in field chambers that were exposed to O 3 at night only, daytime only, and 24 hours 

### 6 showed similar reductions in biomass in night only and day only treatments. Birch 

### 7 seedling showed greater reductions in growth in 24

- h exposures than t hose exposed to O 3 

### 8 at night or day only ( Matyssek et al., 1995 ) . Field mustard ( Brassica rap a ) plants 

### 9 exposed to O 3 during the day or night showed little significa nt difference in the amounts 

### 10

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 119 June 2012 of injury or reduced growth response to O 3 treatment, although the stomatal conductance 

### 1

was 70

- 80% lower at night ( Winner et al., 1989 ) . These studies show that effects can be 

### 2 seen with night

- time exposures to O 3 but when atmospheric co nditions are stable at night, 

### 3 it is uncertain how these exposures may affect plants and trees with complex canopies in 

### 4

the field. 

### 5

Seasonal exposure

Vegetation across the U.S. has widely varying periods of physiological activity during the 

### 6 year due to varia bility in climate and phenology. In order for a particular plant to be 

### 7

vulnerable to O 3 pollution, it must have foliage and be physiologically active. Annual 

### 8 crops are typically grown for periods of two to three months. In contrast, perennial 

### 9 species may b e photosynthetically active longer (up to 12 months each year for some 

### 10 species) depending on the species and where it is grown. In general, the period of 

### 11 maximum physiological activity and thus, potential O 3 uptake for vegetation coincides 

### 12

with some or all of the intra

- annual period defined as the O 3 season, which varies on a 

### 13

state

- by

- state basis ( Figure 3

- 24 ). This is because the high temperature and hi gh light 

### 14 conditions that typically promote the formation of tropospheric O 3 also promote 

### 15 physiological activity in vegetation. There are very limited exceptions to this pattern 

### 16

where O 3 can form in the winter in areas in the western U.S. with intense natural gas 

### 17 exploration ( Pinto, 20 09 ) , but this is typically when plants are dormant and there is little 

### 18

chance of O 3 uptake. Given the significa nt variability in growth patterns and lengths of 

### 19 growing season among the wide range of vegetation species that may experience adverse 

### 20

effects associated with O 3 exposure, no single time window of exposure can work 

### 21 perfectly for all types of vegetation. 

### 22

Various intra

- annual averaging and accumulation time periods have been considered for 

### 23 the protection of vegetation. The 2007 proposal for the se condary O 3 standard (75 FR 

### 24 37818) proposed to use the maximum consecutive 3

- month period within the O 3 season. 

### 25 The U.S. Forest Service and federal land managers have used a 24

- h W126 accumulated 

### 26

for 6 months from April through September ( U.S. Forest Service, 2000 ) . However, some 

### 27 monitors in the U.S. are operational for a s little as four months and would not have 

### 28 enough data for a 6

- month seasonal window. The exposure period in the vast majority of 

### 29

O 3 exposure studies conducted in the U.S. has been much shorter than 6 months. Most of 

### 30 the crop studies done through NCLAN had exposures less than three months with an 

### 31 average of 77 days. Open

- top chamber studies of tree seedlings, compiled by the EPA, 

### 32 had an average exposure of just over three months or 99 days. In more recent FACE 

### 33 experiments, SoyFACE exposed soybeans for an av erage of approximately 120 days per 

### 34 year and the Aspen FACE experiment exposed trees to an average of approximately 

### 35

145 days per year of elevated O 3 , which included the entire growing season at those 

### 36

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 120 June 2012 particular sites. Despite the possibility that plants ma y be exposed to ambient O 3 longer 

### 1

than 3 months in some locations, there is generally a lack of exposure experiments 

### 2 conducted for longer than 3 months. 

### 3

A

B

Note: Data are from the AQS and CASTNET monitors for the years 2008 and 2009. (A) W126, 3 month versus 6 month, 2008 (Pearson correlation = 0.99); (B) W126, 3 month versus 6 month, 2009 (Pearson correlation = 0.99).



### Figure 9

- 13 Maximum 3

- month, 12

- h W126 plotte d against maximum 6

- month, 12

- h W126.Highest 6 month W126

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Highest 3 month W126 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Highest 6 month W126

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Highest 3 month W126 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 121 June 2012 In an analysis of the 3

- and 6

- month maximum W126 values calculated for over 1,200 

### 1 AQS (Air Quality System) and CASTNET (Clean Air Status and Trend Network) EPA 

### 2 monitoring sites for the years 2008

- 2009, it was found that these 2 accumulation periods 

### 3

resulted in highly correlated metrics ( Figure 9

- 13 ). The two accumulation periods were 

### 4 centered on the yearly maximum for each monitoring site, and it is possib le that this 

### 5 correlation would be weaker if the two periods were not temporally aligned. In the U.S., 

### 6 W126 cumulated over 3 months, and W126 cumulated over 6 months are proxies of one 

### 7 another, as long as the period in which daily W126 is accumulated corres ponds to the 

### 8 seasonal maximum. Therefore, it is expected that either statistic will predict vegetation 

### 9 response equally well. In other words, the strength of the correlation between maximum 

### 10

3

- month W126 and maximum 6

- month W126 is such that there is no mat erial difference 

### 11 in their predictive value for vegetation response. 

### 12

9.5.4 Ozone Uptake/Dose Modeling for Vegetation

Another approach for improving risk assessment of vegetation response to ambient O 3 is 

### 13 based on estimating the O 3 concentration from the atmospher e that enters the leaf 

### 14
(i.e., flux or deposition). Interest has been increasing in recent years, particularly in 

### 15 Europe, in using mathematically tractable flux models for O 3 assessments at the regional, 

### 16 national, and European scale ( Matyssek et al., 2008 ; Paoletti and Manning, 2007 ; ICP 

### 17
M&M, 2004 ; Emberson et al., 2000b ; Emberson et al., 2000a ) . Some researchers have 

### 18 claimed that using flux models can be used to better predict vegetation responses to O 3 

### 19 than exposure

- based approaches ( Matyssek et al., 2008 ) . However, other research has 

### 20 suggested that flux models do not predict vegetation responses to O 3 better than 

### 21

exposure

- based models, such as AOT40 ( Gonzalez

- Fernandez et al., 2010 ) . While some 

### 22

efforts have been made in the U.S. to calculate O 3 flux into le aves and canopies ( Fares et 

### 23
al., 2010a ; Turnipseed et al., 2009 ; Uddling et al., 2009 ; Bergweiler et al., 2008 ; Hogg et 

### 24
al., 2007 ; Grulke et al., 2004 ; Grantz et al., 1997 ; Grantz et al., 1995 ) , little information 

### 25 has been published relating these fluxes to effects on vegetation. The lack of flux data in 

### 26 the U.S. and the lack of understanding of detoxification processes h ave made this 

### 27 technique less viable for vulnerability and risk assessments in the U.S. 

### 28

Flux calculations are data intensive and must be carefully implemented. Reducing 

### 29

uncertainties in flux estimates for areas with diverse surface or terrain conditions to 

### 30

within ± 50% requires “very careful application of dry deposition models, some model 

### 31

de velopment, and support by experimental observations” ( Wesely and Hicks, 2000 ) . As 

### 32 an example, the annual average deposition velocity of O 3 among three n earby sites in 

### 33 similar vegetation was found to vary by ± 10%, presumably due to terrain ( Brook et al., 

### 34

1997 ) . Moreover, the authors stated that the actual variation was even greater, because 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 122 June 2012 stomatal uptake was unrealistically assumed to be the same among all sites, and flux is 

### 1 strongly influenced by stomatal conductance ( Brook et al., 1997 ; Massman and Grantz, 

### 2

1995 ; Fuentes et al., 1992 ; Reich, 1987 ; Leuning et al., 1979 ) . This uptake

- based 

### 3 approach to quantify the ve getation impact of O 3 requires inclusion of those factors that 

### 4

control the diurnal and seasonal O 3 flux to vegetation (e.g., climate patterns, species 

### 5 and/or vegetation

- type factors and site

- specific factors). The models have to distinguish 

### 6

between stomata l and non

- stomatal components of O 3 deposition to adequately estimate 

### 7 actual concentration reaching the target tissue of a plant to elicit a response ( Uddling et 

### 8
al., 2009 ) . Determining this O 3 uptake via canopy and stomatal conductance relies on 

### 9 models to predict flux and ultimately the “effective” flux ( Grunhage et al., 2004 ; 

### 10

Massma n, 2004 ; Massman et al., 2000 ) . “Effective flux” has been defined as the balance 

### 11

between O 3 flux and detoxification processes ( Heath et al., 2009 ; Musselman and 

### 12
Massman, 1999 ; Grunhage and Haenel, 1997 ; Dammgen et al., 1993 ) . The 

### 13

time

- integrated “effective flux” is termed “effective dose.” The uptake mechanisms and 

### 14 the resistances in this process, including stomatal conductance and biochemical defense 

### 15
mechanisms, are discussed below. The flux

- based index is the goal for the “Level II” 

### 16

critical level for assessment of O 3 risk to vegetation and ecosystems across Europe 

### 17
( Ashmore et al., 2004a )

. 

### 18

An important consideration in both O 3 exposure and uptake is how the O 3 concentration 

### 19 at the top of low vegetation such as, crops an d tree seedlings may be lower than the 

### 20 height at which the measurement is taken. Ambient monitor inlets in the U.S. are 

### 21 typically at heights of 3 to 5 meters. During daytime hours, the vertical O 3 gradient can 

### 22 be relatively small because turbulent mixing m aintains the downward flux of O 3 . For 

### 23 example, Horvath et al. (1995 ) calculated a 7% decrease in O 3 going from a height of 4 

### 24 meters down to 0.5 meters above the surface during unstable (or turbulent) conditions in 

### 25 a study over low vegetation in Hungary [see Section AX3.3.2. of the 2006 O 3 AQCD 

### 26
( U.S. EPA, 2006b ) ]. There have been several studies indicating decreased O 3 

### 27 concentrations under tree canopies ( Kolb et al., 1997 ; Samuelson and Kelly, 1997 ; Joss 

### 28
and Graber, 1996 ; Fredericksen et al., 1995 ; Lorenzini and Nali, 1995 ; Enders, 1992 ; 

### 29
Fontan et al., 1992 ; Neufeld et al., 1992 ) . In contrast, for forests, measured data may 

### 30

underestimate O 3 concentration at the top of the canopy. The difference between 

### 31 measurement height and canopy height is a funct ion of several factors, the intensity of 

### 32 turbulent mixing in the surface layer and other meteorological factors, canopy height and 

### 33 total deposition to the canopy. Some researchers have used deposition models to estimate 

### 34

O 3 concentration at canopy

- top heigh t based on concentrations at measurement height 

### 35
( Emberson et al., 2000a ) . However, deposition models usua lly require meteorological 

### 36 data inputs that are not always available or well characterized across large geographical 

### 37

scales. 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 123 June 2012 Soil moisture is a critical factor in controlling O 3 uptake through its effect on plant water 

### 1

status and stomatal conductance. In an attempt to relate uptake, soil moisture, and 

### 2 ambient air quality to identify areas of potential risk, available O 3 monitoring data for 

### 3 1983 to 1990 were used along with literature

- based seedling exposure

- response data from 

### 4 regions within the southern Ap palachian Mountains that might have experienced O 3 

### 5 exposures sufficient to inhibit growth ( Lefohn et al., 1997 ) . In a small number of areas 

### 6 within the region, O 3 exposures and soil moisture availability were sufficient to possibly 

### 7 cause growth reductions in some O 3 sensitive species (e.g., black cherry). The 

### 8 conclusions were limited, however, because of the uncertainty in interpolating O 3 

### 9 exposures in many of the areas and because the hydrologic index used might not reflect 

### 10

actual water stress. 

### 11

The non

- stomatal com ponent of plant defenses are the most difficult to quantify, but 

### 12

some studies are available ( Heath et al., 2009 ; Barnes et al., 2002 ; Plochl et al., 2000 ; 

### 13
Chen et al., 1998 ; Massman and Grantz, 1995 )

. Massman et al. (2000 ) developed a 

### 14 conceptual model of a dose

- based index to determine how plant injury response to O 3 

### 15 relates to the traditional exposure

- based parameters. The index used time

- varying



### 16 weighted fluxes to account for the fact that flux was not necessarily correlated with plant 

### 17 injury or damage. The model applied only to plant foliar injury and suggested tha t 

### 18 application of flux

- based models for determining plant damage (yield or biomass) would 

### 19 require a better understanding and quantification of the relationship between injury and 

### 20 damage. 

### 21

9.5.5 Summary

Exposure indices are metrics that quantify exposure as it rela tes to measured plant 

### 22 damage (i.e., reduced growth). They are summary measures of monitored ambient O 3 

### 23 concentrations over time intended to provide a consistent metric for reviewing and 

### 24 comparing exposure

- response effects obtained from various studies. No recent 

### 25 information is available since 2006 that alters the basic conclusions put forth in the 2006 

### 26

and 1996 O 3 AQCDs. These AQCDs focused on the research used to develop various 

### 27 exposure indices to help quantify effects on growth and yield in crops, perenn ials, and 

### 28 trees (primarily seedlings). The performance of indices was compared through regression 

### 29 analyses of earlier studies designed to support the estimation of predictive O 3 exposure



### 30 response models for growth and/or yield of crops and tree (seedling) species. 

### 31

Another approach for improving risk assessment of vegetation response to ambient O 3 is 

### 32 based on determining the O 3 concentration from the atmosphere that enters the leaf 

### 33
(i.e., flux or deposition). Interest has been increasing in recent years, par ticularly in 

### 34

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 124 June 2012 Europe, in using mathematically tractable flux models for O 3 assessments at the regional, 

### 1 national, and European scale ( Matyssek et al., 2008 ; Paoletti and Manning, 2007 ; ICP 

### 2
M&M, 2004 ; Emberson et al., 2000b ; Emberson et al., 2000a ) . While some efforts have 

### 3

bee n made in the U.S. to calculate O 3 flux into leaves and canopies ( Turnipseed et al., 

### 4

2009 ; Uddling et al., 2009 ; Bergweiler et al., 2008 ; Hogg et al., 2007 ; Grulke et al., 2004 ; 

### 5
Grantz et al., 1997 ; Grantz et al., 1 995 ) , little information has been published relating 

### 6 these fluxes to effects on vegetation. There is also conc ern that not all O 3 stomatal uptake 

### 7 results in a yield reduction, which depends to some degree on the amount of internal 

### 8 detoxification occurring with each particular species. Those species having high amounts 

### 9 of detoxification potential may, in fact, show little relationship between O 3 stomatal 

### 10 uptake and plant response ( Muss elman and Massman, 1999 ) . The lack of data in the U.S. 

### 11 and the lack of understanding of detoxification processes have made this technique less 

### 12 viable for vulnerability and risk assessments in the U.S. 

### 13

The main conclusions from the 1996 and 2006 O 3 AQCD s regarding indices based on 

### 14 ambient exposure are still valid. These key conclusions can be restated as follows: 

### 15

 O 3 effects in plants are cumulative; 

### 16

 higher O 3 concentrations appear to be more important than lower 

### 17 concentrations in eliciting a response; 

### 18

 pl ant sensitivity to O 3 varies with time of day and plant development stage; 

### 19

and 

### 20

 quantifying exposure with indices that accumulate the O 3 hourly 

### 21 concentrations and preferentially weight the higher concentrations improves 

### 22 the explanatory power of exposure/res ponse models for growth and yield, over 

### 23 using indices based on mean and peak exposure values. 

### 24

Various weighting functions have been used, including threshold

- weighted 

### 25
(e.g., SUM06) and continuous sigmoid

- weighted (e.g., W126) functions. Based on 

### 26 statistical goodness

- of

- fit tests, these cumulative, concentration

- weighted indices could 

### 27 not be differentiated from one another using data from previous exposure studies. 

### 28

Additional statistical forms for O 3 exposure indices have been discussed in Lee et al. 

### 29
(1988b ) . The majority of studies published since the 2006 O 3 AQCD do not change 

### 30 earlier conclusions, including the importance of peak concentra tions, and the duration 

### 31

and occurrence of O 3 exposures in altering plant growth and yield. 

### 32

Given the current state of knowledge and the best available data, exposure indices that 

### 33 cumulate and differentially weight the higher hourly average concentrations a nd also 

### 34

include the “mid

- level” values continue to offer the most defensible approach for use in 

### 35

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 125 June 2012 developing response functions and comparing studies, as well as for defining future 

### 1 indices for vegetation protection. 

### 2



## 9.6 Ozone Exposure

- Plant Response Relationsh ips

9.6.1 Introduction

The adequate characterization of the effects of O 3 on plants for the purpose of setting air 

### 3 quality standards is contingent not only on the choice of the index used (i.e., SUM06, 

### 4
W126) to summarize O 3 concentrations (Section 9.5 ), but also on quantifying the 

### 5 response of the plant variables of interest at specific values of the selected index. The 

### 6 many factors that determine the respo nse of plants to O 3 exposure have been discussed in 

### 7 previous sections. They include species, genotype and other genetic characteristics 

### 8
(Section 9.3 ), biochemical and physiological status (Section 9.3 ), previous and current 

### 9 exposure to other stressors (Section 9.4.8 ), and characteristics of the exposure itself 

### 10
(Section 9.5 ). Establishing a secondary air quality standard entails the capability to 

### 11 generalize those observations, in order to obtain predictions that are reliable enough 

### 12 under a broad variety of condi tions, taking into account these factors. This section 

### 13 reviews results that have related specific quantitative observations of O 3 exposure with 

### 14 quantitative observations of plant responses, and the predictions of responses that have 

### 15

been derived from those observations through empirical models. 

### 16

For four decades, exposure to O 3 at ambient concentrations found in many areas of the 

### 17 U.S. has been known to cause detrimental effects in plants ( U.S. EPA, 2006b

, 1996b

, 

### 18

1984

, 1978a ) . Results published after the 2006 O 3 AQCD continue to support this 

### 19 finding, and the following sections deal with the quantitative characterizations of the 

### 20 relationship, and what new insights may have appeared since 2006. Detrimental effects 

### 21 on plants include visible injury, decreases in the rate of photosynthesis, reduced growth, 

### 22 and reduced yield of marketable plant parts. Most published exposure

- response data have 

### 23 reported O 3 effects on the yield of crops and the growth of tree seedlings, and those two 

### 24 variables have been the focus of the characterization of ecological impacts o f O 3 for the 

### 25 purpose of setting secondary air quality standards. In order to support quantitative 

### 26 modeling of exposure

- response relationships, data should preferably include more than 

### 27 three levels of exposure, and some control of potential confounding or i nteracting factors 

### 28 should be present in order to model the relationship with sufficient accuracy. Letting 

### 29 potential confounders, such as other stressors, vary freely when generating O 3 exposure



### 30 response data might improve the ‘realism’ of the data, but it also greatly increases the 

### 31 amount of data necessary to extract a clear quantitative description of the relationship. 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 126 June 2012 Conversely however, experimental settings should not be so exhaustively restrictive as to 

### 1 make generalization outside of them problematic. During the last four decades, many of 

### 2

the studies of the effects of O 3 on growth and yield of plants have not included enough 

### 3

levels of O 3 to parameterize more than the simplest linear model. The majority of these 

### 4 studies have only contrasted two levels, a mbient and elevated, or sometimes three by 

### 5 adding carbon filtration in OTC studies, with little or no consideration of quantitatively 

### 6 relating specific values of exposure to specific values of growth or yield. This is not to 

### 7 say that studies that did not i nclude more than two or three levels of O 3 exposure, or 

### 8 studies that were conducted in uncontrolled environments, do not provide exposure



### 9 response information that is highly relevant to reviewing air quality standards. In fact, 

### 10 they can be essential in ver ifying the agreement between predictions obtained through the 

### 11 empirical models derived from experiments such as NCLAN, and observations. The 

### 12 consensus of model predictions and observations from a variety of studies conducted in 

### 13
other locations, at other ti mes, and using different exposure methods, greatly increases 

### 14 confidence in the reliability of both. Furthermore, if they are considered in the aggregate, 

### 15 studies with few levels of exposure or high unaccounted variability can provide 

### 16 additional independent estimates of decrements in plant growth and yield, at least within 

### 17 a few broad categories of exposure. 

### 18

Extensive exposure

- response information on a wide variety of plant species has been 

### 19 produced by two long

- term projects that were designed with the expl icit aim of obtaining 

### 20 quantitative characterizations of the response of such an assortment of crop plants and 

### 21 tree seedlings to O 3 under North American conditions: the NCLAN project for crops, and 

### 22

the EPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Western 

### 23 Ecology Division tree seedling project (NHEERL/WED). The NCLAN project was 

### 24 initiated by the EPA in 1980 primarily to improve estimates of yield loss under field 

### 25 conditions and to estimate the magnitude of crop losses caused by O 3 throug hout the U.S. 

### 26
( Heck et al., 1991 ; 1982 ) . The cultural conditions used in the NCLAN studies 

### 27 approximated typical agronomic practices, and the primary objectives were: (1) to define 

### 28

rela tionships between yields of major agricultural crops and O 3 exposure as required to 

### 29 provide data necessary for economic assessments and development of O 3 NAAQS; (2) to 

### 30 assess the national economic consequences resulting from O 3 exposure of major 

### 31 agricultur al crops; and (3) to advance understanding of cause

- and

- effect relationships that 

### 32 determine crop responses to pollutant exposures. 

### 33

NCLAN experiments yielded 54 exposure

- response curves for 12 crop species, some of 

### 34 which were represented by multiple cultiva rs at several of 6 locations throughout the U.S. 

### 35 The NHEERL/WED project was initiated by EPA in 1988 with similar objectives for tree 

### 36 species, and yielded 49 exposure

- responses curves for multiple genotypes of 11 tree 

### 37 species grown for up to three years in Oregon, Michigan, and the Great Smoky 

### 38

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 127 June 2012 Mountains National Park. Both projects used OTCs to expose plants to three to five 

### 1

levels of O 3 . Eight of the 54 crop datasets were from plants grown under a combination 

### 2

of O 3 exposure and experimental drought conditi ons. Figure 9

- 14 through Figure 9

- 17 

### 3

summari ze some of the NCLAN and NHEERL/WED results. 

### 4

It should be noted that data from FACE experiments might also be used for modeling 

### 5

exposure

- response. They only use two levels of O 3 (ambient concentration at the site and 

### 6 a multiple of it), but given that the v alue of both levels of exposure changes every year, 

### 7 and that they are typically run for many consecutive years, aggregating data over time 

### 8 produces twice as many levels of O 3 as there are years. As described in Section 9.2.4

, 

### 9 FACE experiments seek to impose fewer constraints on the growth environment than 

### 10 OTCs. As a consequence, FACE studies have to contend with larger variability, 

### 11 especially year

- to

- year variability, but the difference in experimental conditions between 

### 12 the two methodologies makes comparisons between their results especially useful. 

### 13

Growth and yield of at least one crop (soybean) has been investigated in yearly 

### 14 experiments since 2001 at a FACE facility in Illinois ( UIUC, 2010 ; Morgan et al., 2006 )

. 

### 15 However, almost all analyses of So yFACE published so far have been based on subsets 

### 16

of one or two years, and have only contrasted ambient versus elevated O 3 as categorical 

### 17 variables. They have not modeled the response of growth and yield to O 3 exposure 

### 18 continuously over the range of exposu re values that have occurred over time. The only 

### 19 exception is a study by Betzelberger et al. (2010 ) , who used a linear regression model on 

### 20 data pooled over 2 years. Likewise, trees of three species (trembling aspen, paper birch, 

### 21 and sugar maple) were grown between 1998 and 2009 in a FACE experiment located in 

### 22
Rhinelander, Wisconsin ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Dickson et al., 2000 ) . The Aspen FACE 

### 23 experiment has provided extensive data on r esponses of trees beyond the seedling stage 

### 24 under long

- term exposure, and also on ecosystem

- level responses (Section 9.4 ), but the 

### 25 only attempt to use those data in a continuous model of the response of tree growth to O 3 

### 26

exposure ( Percy et al., 2007 ) suffered from severe methodological problems, some of 

### 27

which are discussed in Section 9.6.3 . Finally, one experiment was able to exploit a 

### 28 naturally occurring gradient of O 3 concentrations to fit a linear regression model to the 

### 29

grow th of cottonwood ( Gregg et al., 2006

, 2003 ) . Factors such as genotype, soil type an d 

### 30 soil moisture were under experimental control, and the authors were able to partition out 

### 31 the effects of potential confounders such as temperature, atmospheric N deposition, and 

### 32

ambient CO 2
. 

### 33

A serious difficulty in assessing results of exposure

- response research is the multiplicity 

### 34

of O 3 metrics that have been used in reporting. As described in Section 9.5 , metrics that 

### 35 entail either weighting or thresholding of hourly values cannot be algebraically converted 

### 36 into one another, or into unweighted metrics such as hourly average. When computing O 3 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 128 June 2012 exposure using weighted or thresholded metrics, each metric has to be computed 

### 1 separately from the origin al hourly data. Comparisons of exposure

- response models can 

### 2 only be made between studies that used the same metric, and the value of exposure at 

### 3 which a given plant response is expected using one metric of exposure cannot be exactly 

### 4

converted to another me tric. Determining the exposure value at which an effect would be 

### 5 observed in a different metric can only be accomplished by first computing the 

### 6 experimental exposures in this metric from the hourly data, then estimating (fitting) 

### 7 model coefficients again. This problem is irremediable, although useful comparisons 

### 8 might be made using categorical exposures such as ‘current ambient exposure’ or ‘2050 

### 9 projected exposure’, which can serve as a common reference for quantitative values 

### 10 expressed in various metrics. Studies that contained growth or yield exposure

- response 

### 11 data at few levels of exposure, and/or using metrics other than W126 are summarized in 

### 12

Table 9

- 18 and Table 9

- 19

. 

### 13

9.6.2 Estimates of Crop Yield Loss and Tree Seedling Biomass Loss in the 1996 and 2006 Ozone AQCDs

The 1996 and 2006 O 3 AQCDs relied ext ensively on analyses of NCLAN and 

### 14 NHEERL/WED by Lee et al. (1994 ); ( 1989

, 1988b

, 1987 )

, Hogsett et al. (1997 )

, Lee and 

### 15
Hogsett (1999 )

, Heck et al. (1984 )

, ( Rawlings and Cure, 1985 )

, ( Lesser et al., 1990 ) , and 

### 16
( Gumpertz and Rawlings, 1992 ) . Those analyses concluded that a three

- parameter 

### 17

Weibull model

– 

### 18

β



### η 

# α        

−



# = 126 W



# e Y

Equation 9

- 2

is the most appropriate model for the response of absolute yield and growth to O 3 

### 19 exposure, because of the interpretability of its parameters, its flexibility (given the small 

### 20 number of parameters), and its tractability for estimation. In addition, removing the 

### 21
intercept 

### α results in a model of relative yield (yield relative to [yield at exposure=0]) 

### 22
without any further reparameterization. Formulating the model in terms of relative yield 

### 23 or relative yield loss (yield loss=[1

− relative yield]) is essential in comparing exposure



### 24 response across species, genotypes, or experiments for whic h absolute values of the 

### 25 response may vary greatly. In the 1996 and 2006 O 3 AQCDs, the two

- parameter model of 

### 26 relative yield was used in deriving common models for multiple species, multiple 

### 27 genotypes within species, and multiple locations. 

### 28

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 129 June 2012 Given the dispa rate species, genotypes, and locations that were included in the NCLAN 

### 1 and NHEERL/WED projects, and in the absence of plausible distributional assumptions 

### 2 with respect to those variables, a three step process using robust methods was used to 

### 3 obtain paramet er estimates that could be generalized. The models that were derived for 

### 4 each species or group of species were referred to as median composite functions. In the 

### 5 first step, the three parameters of the Weibull model were computed for absolute yield or 

### 6

bioma ss data from each NCLAN and NHEERL/WED experiment (54 crop datasets and 

### 7 49 tree seedling datasets), using nonlinear regression. When data were only available for 

### 8 three levels of exposure because of experimental problems, the shape parameter β was 

### 9

constrain ed to 1, reducing the model to an exponential decay model. In the second step, α 

### 10 was dropped, and predicted values of relative yield or biomass were then computed for 

### 11

12

- hour W126 exposures between 0 and 60 ppm

- h. At each of these W126 exposure 

### 12
values, the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the response were identified among the 

### 13 predicted curves of relative response. For example, for the 34 NCLAN studies of 12 crop 

### 14 species grown under non

- droughted conditions for a complete cropping cycle 

### 15
( Figure 9

- 14 ), the 3 quartiles of the response were identified at every integer value of 

### 16 W126 between 0 and 60. The third step fitted a two

- parameter Weibull model to t hose 

### 17 percentiles, yielding the median composite function for the relative yield or biomass 

### 18
response to O 3 exposure for each grouping of interest (e.g., all crops, all trees, all datasets 

### 19 for one species), as well as composite functions for the other quarti les. In the 1996 and 

### 20

2006 O 3 AQCDs this modeling of crop yield loss and tree seedling biomass loss was 

### 21 conducted using the SUM06 metric for exposure. This section updates those results by 

### 22 using the 12

- hour W126 as proposed in 2007 (72 FR 37818) and 2010 (7 5 FR 2938, page 

### 23
3003). Figure 9

- 14 through Figure 9

- 17 present quantiles of predicted relative yield or 

### 24

biomass loss at seven values of the 12

- h W126 for some representative groupings of 

### 25

NCLAN and NHEERL/WED results. Table 9

- 9 through Table 9

- 11 give the 90

- day 12

- h 

### 26

W126 O 3 exposure values at which 10 and 20% yield or biomass losses are predicted in 

### 27 50 and 75% of crop or tree species using the composite functions. 

### 28

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 130 June 2012 Note: Quantiles of the predicted relative yield loss at 7 values of 12

- hour W126 for 34 Weibull curves estimat ed using nonlinear regression on data from 34 studies of 12 crop species grown under well

- watered conditions for the full duration of 1 cropping cycle. Source of Weibull parameters: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 14 Quantiles of predicted relative yield loss for 34 NCLAN crop experiments. 10 th Pctile 25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile 90 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Yield Loss (%)

12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 34 crop datasets

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 131 June 2012 Notes: Quantiles of the predicted relative yield loss at 7 values of 1 2

- h W126 for Weibull curves estimated using nonlinear regression for 4 species grown under well

- watered conditions for the full duration of 1 cropping cycle. The number of studies available for each species is indicated on each plot. Source of Weibull par ameters: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 15 Quantiles of predicted relative yield loss for 4 crop species in NCLAN experiments. 25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 7 Wheat datasets

25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Yield Loss (%) 11 Soybean datasets

50th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 2 Corn datasets

25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Yield Loss (%)

12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr 5 Cotton datasets

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 132 June 2012 Note: Quantiles of the predicted relative above

- ground biomass loss at 7 values of 12

- h W126 for 49 Weibull curves estimated using nonlinear regression on data from 49 studies of 11 tree species grown under well

- watered conditions for 1 or 2 years. Curves were standardized to 90

- day W126. Source of Weibull parameters: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 16 Quantiles of predicted relative biomass loss for 49 tree species in NHEERL/WED experiments. 10 th Pctile 25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile 90 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Biomass Loss (%)

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 49 tree seedlings datasets

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 133 June 2012 Note: Quantiles of the predicted relative above

- ground biomass loss at 7 exposure values of 12

- h W126 for Weibull curves estimated using nonlinear r egression on data for 4 tree species grown under well

- watered conditions for 1 or 2 year. Curves were standardized to 90

- day W126. The number of studies available for each species is indicated on each plot. Source of Weibull parameters: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 17 Quantiles of predicted relative biomass loss for 4 tree species in NHEERL/WED experiments. 25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Biomass Loss (%) 14 Aspen datasets

25 th Pctile 50 th Pctile 75 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 11 Ponderosa pine datasets

50 th Pctile 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60Percent Biomass Loss (%)

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 7 Douglas fir datasets

50 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 3 Tulip poplar datasets

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 134 June 2012 Table 9

- 9 Ozone exposures at which 10 and 20% yield loss is predicted for 50 and 75% of crop species.

Predited Yield Loss for Crop Species a 90

- day 12

- h W126 for 10% yield loss (ppm

- h) 90

- day 12

- h W126 for 20% yield loss (ppm

- h)

Model for the 50th Percentile of 34

curves

Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/104.82)**1.424) 22 37

Model for the 75th Percentile of 34

curves

Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/78.12)**1.415) 16 27

a Based on composite functions for the 50th and 75th percentiles of 34 Weibull curves for relative yield loss data from 34 non

droughted NCLAN studies of 12 crop species; curves were standardized to 90

- day W126. Source of parameters for the 34 curves: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Table 9

- 10 Ozone exposures at which 10 and 20% yield loss is predicted for 50 and 75% of crop species (Droughted versus Watered conditions).

Predicted Yield Loss for Crop Species a 90 day 12

- h W126 for 10% yield loss (ppm

- h) 90 day 12

- h W126 for 20% yield loss (ppm

- h)

Model for the 50th Percentile of 2 × 8 curves

Watered Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/132.86)**1.170) 19 37

Droughted Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/179.84)**1.713) 48 75

Model for the 75th Percentile of 2 × 8 curves

Watered Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/90.43)**1.310) 16 29

Droughted Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/105.16)**1.833) 31 46

a Under drought conditions and adequate moisture based on composite functions for the 50th and 75th percentiles of 16 Weibull curves for relative yield loss data from 8 NCLAN studies that paired droughted and watered conditions for the same genotype; curves were standardized to 90

- day W126.

Sour ce of parameters for the 16 curves: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 135 June 2012 Table 9

- 11 Ozone exposures at which 10 and 20% biomass loss is predicted for 50 and 75%of tree species.

Predicted Biomass Loss for Tree Species a 90 day 12 h W126 for 10% yield loss (ppm

- h) 90 day 12 h W126 for 20% yield loss (ppm

- h)

Model for the 50th Percentile of 49

curves
Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/131.57)**1.242) 21 39

Model for the 75th Percentile of 49

curves
Relative yield=exp(

- (W126/65.49)**1.500) 15 24

a Based on composite functions for the 50th and 75th percentiles of 49 Weibull curves for relative above

- ground biomass loss data from 49 studies of 11 tree species grown under well

- watered conditions for 1 or 2 year; curves were standardized to 90

- day W126. Source of parameters for the 49 curves: Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### 9.6.3 Validation of 1996 and 2006 Ozone AQCD Models and Methodology Using the 90 day 12

- h W126 and Current FACE Data

Since the completion of the NCLAN and NHEERL/WED projects, almost no studies 

### 1 have been published that could provide a basis for estimates of exposure

- response that 

### 2 can be compared to those of the 1996 and 2006 O 3 AQCDs. Most experiments, regardless 

### 3 of exposure methodology, include only two levels of exposure. In addition, very few 

### 4 studies have included measurements of exposure using the W126 metric, or the hourly O 3 

### 5 concentration data that would allow computing exposure using the W126. Two FACE 

### 6 projects, however, were conducted over multipl e years, and by adding to the number of 

### 7 exposure levels over time, can support independent model estimation and prediction 

### 8 using the same model and the same robust process as summarized in Section 9.6.2

. 

### 9 Hourly O 3 data were available from both FACE projects. 

### 10

The SoyFACE project is situated near Champaign, IL, and comprises 32 octagonal rings 

### 11
(20m

- diameter), 4 of which in a given year are exposed to a mbient conditions, and 4 of 

### 12 which are exposed to elevated O 3 as a fixed proportion of the instantaneous ambient 

### 13

concentration ( Betzelberger et al., 2010 ; UIUC, 2010 ; Morgan et al., 2006 ; Morgan et al., 

### 14

2004 ) . Since 2002, yield data have been collected for up to 8 genotypes of soybean 

### 15 grown in subplots within each ring. The Aspen FACE project is situated in Rhinelander, 

### 16 WI, and comprises 12 rings (30m

- diameter), 3 of which are exposed to ambient 

### 17 conditions, and 3 of which are exposed to O 3 as a fixed proportion of the instantaneous 

### 18

ambient concentration ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Karnosky et al., 2005 ; Dickson et al., 

### 19

2000 ) . In the summer of 1997, half the area of each ring was planted with small (five to 

### 20 seven leaf sized) clonally propagated plants of five genotypes of trembling aspen, which 

### 21 were left to grow in those environments until 2009. Biomass data are currently available 

### 22

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 136 June 2012 for the years 1997

- 2005 ( King et al., 2005 ) . Ozone exposure in these two FACE projects 

### 1 can be viewed as a categorical variable with two levels: ambient, and elevated. However, 

### 2 this overlooks the facts that not only do both ambient a nd elevated exposure vary from 

### 3 year to year, but the proportionality between them also changes yearly. This change has 

### 4 two sources: first, the dispensing of O 3 into the elevated exposure rings varies from the 

### 5 set point for the ambient/elevated proportional ity to some extent, and for SoyFACE, the 

### 6 set point changed between years. Second, when using threshold or concentration



### 7 weighted cumulative metrics (such as AOT40, SUM06 or W126), the proportionality 

### 8 does not propagate regularly from the hourly data to the yearly value. For example, 

### 9 hourly average elevated exposures that are a constant 1.5 times greater than ambient do 

### 10 not result in AOT40, SUM06 or W126 values that are some constant multiple of the 

### 11 ambient values of those indices. Depending on the fraction of hourly values that are 

### 12 above the threshold or heavily weighted, the same average yearly exposure will result in 

### 13 different exposure values when using thresholded or weighted metrics. In some years, 

### 14 elevated exposures in FACE experiments experience many m ore values above the 

### 15 threshold, or more heavily weighted than the ambient exposures; thus in those years, the 

### 16 distance between ambient and elevated exposure values increases relative to other years. 

### 17 As a consequence, the number of exposure levels in multi

- year experiments is twice the 

### 18 number of years. In the case of SoyFACE for the period between 2002 and 2008, ambient 

### 19 exposure in the highest year was approximately equal to elevated exposure in the lowest 

### 20 year, with 14 levels of O 3 exposure evenly distribut ed from lowest to highest. The 

### 21 particular conditions of the Aspen FACE experiment resulted in 12 exposure levels 

### 22 between 1998 and 2003, but they were not as evenly distributed between minimum and 

### 23

maximum over the 6

- year period. 

### 24

There are necessary differen ces in the modeling of exposure

- response in annual plants 

### 25 such as soybean, and in perennial plants such as aspen trees, when exposure takes place 

### 26 over multiple years. In annual plants, responses recorded at the end of the life cycle, 

### 27
i.e., yearly, are anal yzed in relationship to that year’s exposure. Yield of soybeans is 

### 28 affected by exposure during the year the crop was growing, and a new crop is planted 

### 29 every year. Thus an exposure

- response relationship can be modeled from yearly 

### 30 responses matched to yearl y exposures, with those exposure

- response data points having 

### 31 been generated in separate years. For perennial organisms, which are not harvested yearly 

### 32 and continue to grow from year to year, such pairing of exposure and response cannot be 

### 33

done without acco unting for time. Not only does the size of the organism at the beginning 

### 34 of each year of exposure increase, but size is also dependent on the exposure from 

### 35 previous years. Therefore the relationship of response and exposure must be analyzed 

### 36 either one year at a time, or by standardizing the response as a yearly increment relative 

### 37 to size at the beginning of each year. Furthermore, the relevant measurement of exposure 

### 38 is cumulative, or cumulative yearly average exposure, starting in the year exposure was 

### 39

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 137 June 2012 ini tiated, up to the end of the year of interest. When analyzing the growth of trees over 

### 1 several years, it would be evidently incorrect to pair the exposure level in every discrete 

### 2 year with absolute size of the trees that year, and posit a direct relationsh ip between them, 

### 3 without taking increasing age into consideration. In the Aspen FACE experiment, for 

### 4 example, one could not establish an exposure

- response relationship by matching 

### 5

12 yearly exposures and 12 yearly tree sizes, while disregarding age as if s ize did not also 

### 6 depend on it. This is the basis of the 2 007 study of Aspen FACE data by Percy et al. 

### 7
(2007 ) , which compares the size of trees of various ages as if they were all the same age, 

### 8

and was therefore not informative. 

### 9

9.6.3.1 Comparison of NCLAN

- Based Prediction and SoyFACE Data

For this ISA, EPA conducted a comparison between yield of soybean as predicted by the 

### 10 composite function three

- step process (Section 9.6.2 ) using NCLAN data, and 

### 11 observations of yield in SoyFACE. The median composite function for relative yield was 

### 12 derived for the 11 NCLAN soybean Weibull functions for non

- droughted studies, and 

### 13 comparisons between the predictions of the median composite and SoyFACE 

### 14

observations were conducted as follows. 

### 15

For the years 2007 and 2008, SoyFACE yield data were available for 7 and 6 genotypes, 

### 16 respectively. The EPA used those data to compare the relative change in yield observed 

### 17 in SoyFACE in a given year betwee n ambient O 3 and elevated O 3 , versus the relative 

### 18 change in yield predicted by the NCLAN

- based median composite function between 

### 19

those same two values of O 3 exposure. The two parameter median composite function for 

### 20 relative yield of soybean based on NCLAN data was used to predict yield response at the 

### 21 two values of exposure observed in SoyFACE in each year, and the change between yield 

### 22 under ambient and elevated was compared to the change observed in SoyFACE for the 

### 23 relevant year ( Table 9

- 12 ). This approach results in a direct comparison of predicted 

### 24 versus observed change in yield. Because the value of relative response between any two 

### 25

values of O 3 expo sure is independent of the intercept α, this comparison does not require 

### 26 prediction of the absolute values of the responses. 

### 27

Since comparisons of absolute values might be of interest, the predictive functions were 

### 28 also scaled to the observed data: SoyFACE data were used to compute an intercept α 

### 29 while the shape and scale parameters (β and η) were held at their value in the NCLAN 

### 30 predictive model. This method gives a comparison of prediction and observation that 

### 31

takes all the observed information into accoun t to provide the best possible estimate of 

### 32 the intercept, and thus the best possible scaling ( 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 138 June 2012 Table 9

- 13 and Figure 9

- 18 ). For the comparison of NCLAN and SoyFACE, this 

### 1 validation was possible for 2007 and 2008, where data for 7 and 6 soybean genotypes, 

### 2 respectively, were available. The median compo site function for relative yield was 

### 3 derived for the 11 NCLAN soybean Weibull functions for nondroughted studies, and the 

### 4 values of median yield under ambient exposure at SoyFACE in 2007 and 2008 were used 

### 5 to obtain an estimate of the intercept α for the N CLAN median function in each of the 

### 6

two years. Table 9

- 12 presents the results of ambient/elevated relative yield comparisons 

### 7

between the NCLAN

- derived predictions and SoyFACE observations. 

### 8

Table 9

- 13 and Figure 9

- 18 present the results of comparisons between NCLAN

- derived 

### 9 predictions and SoyFACE observations of yield, with the predictive function scaled to 

### 10 provide absolute yield values. 

### 11

Table 9

- 12 Comparison between change in yield observed in the SoyFACE experiment between elevated and a mbient ozone, and change predicted at the same values of ozone by the median composite function for NCLAN.

Year 90

- day 12

- h W126 (ppm

- h) observed at SoyFACE Yield in Elevated O 3 Relative to Ambient O 3 (%)

Ambient Elevated Predicted by NCLAN a Observed at SoyFACE

2007 4.39 46.23 75 76

2008 3.23 28.79 85 88

a Two

- parameter relative yield model.



### Table 9

- 13 Comparison between yield observed in the SoyFACE experiment and yield predicted at the same values of ozone by the median composite function for NCLAN.

Year 90

- day 12

- h W126 (ppm

- h) observed at SoyFACE Yield predicted by NCLAN a (g/m 2 ) Yield observed at SoyFACE (g/m 2 )

Ambient Elevated Ambient Elevated Ambient Elevated

2007 4.39 46.23 309.2 230.6 305.2 230.6

2008 3.23 28.79 350.3 298.2 344.8 304.4

a Three

- parameter absolute yield model with intercept scaled to SoyFACE data.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 139 June 2012 Note: Black dots are the median of 7 or 6 soybean genotypes in SoyFACE (2007, 2008); bars are Inter

- Quartile Range for genotypes; dashed line is median composite model for 11 studies in NCLAN.

Source of data: Betzelberger et al. (2010 ); Morgan et al. (2006 ); Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 18 Comparison of yield observed in SoyFACE experiment in a given year with yield predicted by the median composite function based on NCLAN.

Finally, a composite function for the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles was developed from 

### 1 SoyFACE annual yield data, and compared to the NCLAN

- based function. The process 

### 2

described in Section 9.6.2 was applied to SoyFACE data for individual genotypes, 

### 3 aggregated over the years during which each was grown; one genotype from 2003 to 

### 4 2007, and six genotypes in 2007 and 2008. First, the three parameter Weibull mod el 

### 5

described in Section 9.6.2 was estimated using nonlinear regression on exposure

- yield 

### 6 data for each genotype separately, over the years for whic h data were available, totaling 

### 7 seven curves. The 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the predicted values for the two 

### 8 parameter relative yield curves were then identified at every integer of W126 between 0 

### 9
and 60, and a two

- parameter Weibull model estimat ed by regression for the three 

### 10 quartiles. The comparison between these composite functions for the quartiles of relative 

### 11 yield loss in SoyFACE and the corresponding composite functions for NCLAN is 

### 12 presented in Figure 9

- 19

. 

### 13 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Yield (g/m2)

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 2007, 7 genotypes

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Yield (g/m2)

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr) 2008, 6 genotypes

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 140 June 2012 Source of data: Betzelberger et al. (2010 ); Morgan et al. (2006 ); Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 19 Comparison of composite functions for the quartiles of 7 curves for 7 genotypes of soybean grown in the SoyFACE experiment, and for the quartiles of 11 curves for 5 genotypes of soybean grown in the NCLAN project.

As seen in 

### 1

Table 9

- 13 and Table 9

- 14 , and in Table 9

- 18 , the agreement between predictions based 

### 2 on NCLAN data and SoyFACE observations was notably close in single

- year 

### 3 comparisons. Together with the very high agreement between median composite models 

### 4

for NCL AN and SoyFACE ( Figure 9

- 19 ), it provides very strong mutual confirmation of 

### 5 those two projects’ results with respect to the response of yield of soybe ans to O 3 

### 6 exposure. It is readily apparent from these results that the methodology described in 

### 7

Section 9.6.2 for obtaining predictions of yield or yield loss from NCLAN data is 

### 8 strongly validated by SoyFACE results. As described in Section 9.2 , the exposure 

### 9 technologies used in the two projects were in sharp contrast, specifically with respect to 

### 10 the balance each achieved between control of potential interacting factors or confounders, 

### 11 and fidelity to natural conditions. The comparisons that EP A conducted therefore 

### 12 demonstrate that the methodology used in developing the composite functions is resistant 

### 13 to the influence of nuisance variables and that predictions are reliable. They may also 

### 14 FACE 75 th Pctile FACE median FACE 25 th Pctile NCLAN 75 th Pctile

NCLAN median

NCLAN 25 th Pctile

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Percent Yield Loss (%)

90 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr)

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 141 June 2012 suggest that the aspects in which the two exposure techno logies differ have less influence 

### 1

on exposure

- response than initially supposed. These results are also in agreement with 

### 2 comparative studies reviewed in Section 9.2.6

. 

### 3

9.6.3.2 Comparison of NHEERL/WED

- Based Prediction of Tree Biomass Response and Aspen FACE Data

EPA also conducted two comparisons between prediction of above

- ground biomass loss 

### 4 based on NHEERL/WED results and observations from Aspen FACE. The median 

### 5 composite function was developed from NHEERL/WED data for 11 studies that used 

### 6

wild

- type seedlings of aspen as well as four clonally propagated genotypes. All plants 

### 7 were grown in OTCs for one growing season before being destructively harvested. As pen 

### 8 FACE data were from clonally propagated trees of five genotypes grown from 1998 to 

### 9
2003, with above

- ground biomass calculated using allometric equations derived from 

### 10 data for trees harvested destructively in 2000 and 2002 ( King et al., 2005 )

. 

### 11

The two parameter median composite function for relative biomass was used to predict 

### 12 biomass response under the observed elevated exposure, relative to its value under 

### 13 observed ambient exposure, for each separate year of Aspen FACE. EPA first compared 

### 14 Aspen FACE observations of the change in biomass between ambient and elevated 

### 15 exposure with the corresponding prediction at the same values of exposure. Comparisons 

### 16 between observed and predicted absolute bio mass values were then conducted for each 

### 17 year by scaling the predictive function to yearly Aspen FACE data as described for 

### 18 soybean data in Section 9.6.3.1 . In all cases, yearly 90 day 12

- hour W126 values for 

### 19 Aspen FACE were computed as the cumulative average from the year of planting up to 

### 20 the year of interest. A comparison of composite functions between NHEERL/WED and 

### 21 Aspen FACE, similar to the one performed for NCLAN and SoyFACE, was not possible: 

### 22

as discussed in the introduction to Section 9.6 , the pairing of 12 exposure values from 

### 23

separat e years and 12 values of biomass cannot be the basis for a model of exposure



### 24 response, because the trees continued growing for the six

- year period of exposure. 

### 25 Because the same trees were used for the entire duration, and continued to grow, data 

### 26

could not be aggregated over years. Table 9

- 14 presents the results of ambient/elevated 

### 27 relative biomass comparisons between the NHEERL/WED

- derived predictions and 

### 28 Aspen FACE observations. 

### 29

Table 9

- 15 and Figure 9

- 20 present the results of the comparison between 

### 30

NHEERL/WED

- derived pred ictions and Aspen FACE observations for absolute biomass, 

### 31 using Aspen FACE data to scale the NHEERL/WED

- derived composite function. 

### 32

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 142 June 2012 Table 9

- 14 Comparison between change in above

- ground biomass elevated and amb ient ozone in Aspen FACE experiment in 6 year, and change predicted at the same values of ozone by the median composite function for NHEERL/WED.

Table 9

- 15 Comparison between above

- ground biomass observed in Aspen FACE experiment in 6 year and biomass predicted by the median composite function based on NHEERL/WED.

Year 90 day 12

- h W126 (ppm

- h) Cumulative Average observed at Aspen FACE Biomass Predicted by NHEERL/WED a (g/m 2 ) Biomass Observed at Aspen FACE (g/m 2 )

Ambient Elevated Ambient Elevated Ambient Elevated

1998 3.19 30.08 276.0 203.2 274.7 204.9

1999 2.61 33.85 958.7 668.3 955.3 673.3

2000 2.43 30.16 1382.4 1022.8 1400.3 998.6

2001 2.55 31.00 1607.0 1173.7 1620.7 1154.9

2002 2.51 30.27 2079.0 1532.1 2125.9 1468.4

2003 2.86 29.12 2640.1 1981.2 2695.2 1907.8

a Three

- parameter absolute biomass model with intercept scaled to Aspen FACE data. Year 90

- day 12

- h W126 (ppm

- h) Cumulative Average observed at Aspen FACE Above

- Ground Biomass in

Elevated O 3 relative To Ambient O 3 (%)

Ambient Elevated Predicted by NHEERL/WED a Observed at Aspen FACE

1998 3.19 30.08 74 75

1999 2.61 33.85 70 70

2000 2.43 30.16 74 71

2001 2.55 31.00 73 71

2002 2.51 30.27 74 69

2003 2.86 29.12 75 71

a Two

- parameter relative biomass model

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 143 June 2012 Note: Black dots are aspen biomass/m 2 for 3 FACE rings filled with an assemblage of 5 clonal genotypes of aspen at Aspen FACE; bars are SE for 3 rings; dashed line is median composite model for 4 clonal genotypes and wild

- type seedlings in 11 NHEERL/WED 1

- year OTC studies.

Source of data: King et al. (2005 ); Lee and Hogsett (1996 )

.



### Figure 9

- 20 Comparison between above

- ground biomass observed in Aspen FACE experiment in 6 year and biomass predicted by the median composite function based on NHEERL/WED.

As in the comparisons between NCLAN and SoyFACE, the agreement between 

### 1 prediction s based on NHEERL/WED data and Aspen FACE observations was very close. 

### 2 The results of the two projects strongly reinforce each other with respect to the response 

### 3 of aspen biomass to O 3 exposure. The methodology used for obtaining the median 

### 4 composite funct ion is shown to be capable of deriving a predictive model despite 

### 5 potential confounders, and despite the added measurement error that is expected from 

### 6 calculating biomass using allometric equations. In addition, the function based on 

### 7

one year of growth was shown to be applicable to subsequent years. 

### 8

The results of experiments that used different exposure methodologies, different 

### 9 genotypes, locations, and durations converged to the same values of response to O 3 

### 10 exposure for each of two very dissimilar plan t species, and predictions based on the 

### 11 earlier experiments were validated by the data from current ones. However, in these 

### 12 comparisons, the process used in establishing predictive functions involved aggregating 

### 13
data over variables such as time, locations, and genotypes, and the use of a robust statistic 

### 14 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Biomass (g/m2)

90 day 12 hr W126 (yearly cumulative average, ppm

- hr)

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 144 June 2012 (quartiles) for that aggregation. The validating data, from SoyFACE and Aspen FACE, 

### 1 were in turn aggregated over the same variables. The accuracy of predictions is not 

### 2 expected to be conserved for individua l values of those variables over which aggregation 

### 3 occurred. For example, the predicted values for soybean, based on data for five 

### 4 genotypes, are not expected to be valid for each genotype separately. As shown in the 

### 5 validation, however, aggregation that o ccurred over different values of the same variable 

### 6 did not affect accuracy: composite functions based on one set of genotypes were 

### 7 predictive for another set, as long as medians were used for both sets. A study of 

### 8
cottonwood ( Populus deltoides ) conducted u sing a naturally occurring gradient of O 3 

### 9

exposure ( Gregg et al., 2006

, 2003 ) may provide an illustration of the response of an 

### 10 individual species whose response is far from the median response for an aggregation of 

### 11 species. 

### 12

9.6.3.3 Exposure

- Response in a Gradient Stu dy

Gregg et al. (2003 ) grew saplings of one clonally propagated genotype of cottonwood 

### 13
( Populus deltoides ) in seven locations within New York City and in the surrounding 

### 14 region between July and September in 1992, 1993 and 1994, and harvest ed them 72 days 

### 15 after planting. Owing to regional gradients of atmospheric O 3 concentration, the 

### 16 experiment yielded eight levels of exposure ( Figure 9

- 21 ), and the authors were able to 

### 17

rule out environmental variables other than O 3 to account for the large differences in 

### 18 biomass observed after one season of growth. The deficit in growth increased 

### 19 substantially faster with increasing O 3 exposure than has been observed in aspen, another 

### 20 species of the same genus ( Populus tremuloides , Section 9.6.3.2 ). Using a three 

### 21 parameter Weibull model ( Figure 9

- 21 ), the biomass of cottonwood at a W126 exposure 

### 22

of 15 ppm

- h, relative to biomass at 5 ppm

- h, is estimated to be 0.18 (18% of growth at 

### 23

5 ppm

- h ). The relative biomass of trembling aspen within the same 5

- 15 ppm

- h range of 

### 24 exposure is estimated to be 0.92, using the median composite model for aspen whose 

### 25 very close agreement with Aspen FACE data was shown in Section 9.6.3.2 . Using a 

### 26 median composite function for all deciduous trees in the NHEERL/WED project (6 

### 27 species in 21 studies) also gives predictions that are very distant from the cotton wood 

### 28 response observed in this experiment. For all deciduous tree species in NHEERL/WED, 

### 29 biomass at a W126 exposure of 15 ppm

- h, relative to biomass at 5 ppm

- h, was estimated 

### 30

to be 0.87. 

### 31

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 145 June 2012 Note: Line represents the three

- parameter Weibull model.

Source: Mo dified with permission of Nature Publishing Group ( Gregg et al., 2003 )

.



### Figure 9

- 21 Above

- ground biomass for one genotype of cottonwood grown in seven locations for one season in 3 years.

As shown in Section 9.6.2 , the median models available for trembling aspen and soybean 

### 1 have verifiable predictive ability for those particular species. This su ggests that the 

### 2 corresponding NCLAN

- and NHEERL/WED

- based models for multiple crop and tree 

### 3 species can provide reliable estimates of losses for similar assortments of species. 

### 4 However, their predictive ability would likely be poor for individual species n ot tested. 

### 5

The cottonwood data of Gregg et al. (2003 ) show an extremely severe response to O 3
. 

### 6 They are consistent with the expectation that among species and genotypes, some are 

### 7 likely to be substantially more sensitive than a median mea sure, such as the estimate 

### 8 produced by NHEERL/WED ( Figure 9

- 16 ), but the sensitivity of this particular species 

### 9

has not been studied elsewhere. 

### 10

An al ternative hypothesis for the difference between the response of cottonwood in this 

### 11 experiment and deciduous tree species in NHEERL/WED, or the difference between the 

### 12 response of cottonwood and aspen in NHEERL/WED and Aspen FACE, could be the 

### 13 presence of co nfounding factors in the environments where the experiment was 

### 14 conducted. However, variability in temperature, moisture, soil fertility, and atmospheric 

### 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Biomass (g)

72 day 12 hr W126 (ppm

- hr)

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 146 June 2012 deposition of N were all ruled out by Gregg et al. (2003 ) as contributing to the obser ved 

### 1
response to O 3 . In addition, this hypothesis would imply that the unrecognized 

### 2
confounder(s) were either absent from both OTC and FACE studies, or had the same 

### 3 value in both. This is not impossible, but the hypothesis that cottonwood is very sensitive 

### 4

to O 3 exposure is more parsimonious, and sufficient. 

### 5

9.6.3.4 Meta

- analyses of growth and yield studies

Since the 2006 O 3 AQCD, five studies have used meta

- analytic methods to integrate 

### 6 results from experimental studies of crops or tree species relevant to the U.S. It is 

### 7 possible to obtain exposure

- response data for growth and yield from those meta

- analyses, 

### 8 but because all of them provided summary measurements of O 3 exposure as hourly 

### 9 averages of various lengths of exposures, comparisons with exposure

- response resu lts 

### 10 where exposure is expressed as W126 are problematic. Table 9

- 16 summarizes the 

### 11

characteristics of the five meta

- analyses. They all included studies conducted in the U.S. 

### 12 and other locations worldwide, and all of them expressed responses as comparative 

### 13 change between levels of exposure to O 3 , with carbon filtered air ( CF) among those 

### 14 levels. Using hourly average concentration to summarize exposure, CF rarely equates 

### 15

with absence of O 3 , although it almost always near zero when exposure is summarized as 

### 16
W126, SUM06, or AOT40. 

### 17

Table 9

- 16 Meta

- analyses of growth or yield studies published since 2005.

Study Number of articles included Years of publication surveyed Crop, species or
genera Response Number of O 3 levels Duration of
exposure

Ainsworth (2008 ) 12 1980

- 2007 R ice Yield 2 unreported

Feng et al. (2008b ) 53 1980

- 2007 W heat Yield 5 >10 days

Feng and Kobayashi (2009 ) All crops together : 81 1980

- 2007 Potato, barley, wheat, rice, bean, soybean Yield 3 >10 days

Grantz et al. (2006 ) 16 1992

- 2004 34 H erbaceous dicots

21 H erbaceous monocots

5 T ree species Relative Growth Rate 2 2

- 24 weeks

Wittig et al. (2009 ) Al l responses:263

Articles that included biomass:unreported 1970

- 2006 4 G ymnosperm tree genera
11 A ngiosperm tree
genera Total biomass 4 >7 days

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 147 June 2012 The only effect of O 3 exposu re on yield of rice reported in Ainsworth (2008 ) was a 

### 1 decrease of 14% with exposure increasing from CF to 62 ppb average concentration. 

### 2 Feng et al. (2008b ) were able to separate exposure of wheat into four classes with average 

### 3
concentrations of 42, 69, 97, an d 153 ppb, in data where O 3 was the only treatment. Mean 

### 4 responses relative to CF were yield decreases of 17, 25, 49, and 61% respectively. Feng 

### 5
et al. (2008b ) observed that wheat yield losses were smaller under conditions of drought, 

### 6 and that Spring wheat and Winter wheat appeared similarly affected. However, mean 

### 7

expos ure in studies of Winter wheat was substantially higher than in studies of Spring 

### 8
wheat (86 versus 64 ppb), which suggests that the yield of Spring wheat was in fact more 

### 9 severely affected, since yield was approximately the same, even though Spring wheat w as 

### 10 exposed to lower concentrations. Exposures of the six crops considered in Feng and 

### 11 Kobayashi (2009 ) were classified into two ranges, each compared to CF air. In the lower 

### 12 range of exposure (41

- 49 ppb), potato studies had the highest average exposure (45 ppb) 

### 13
and wheat and rice the lowest (41 ppb). In the higher range (51

- 75 ppb), wheat studies 

### 14 had the highest average exposure (65 ppb), and potato, barley and rice the lowest 

### 15
(63 ppb). In other words, across the studies included, all crops were exposed to very 

### 16

similar levels of O 3 . At approximately 42 ppb, the yield of potato, barley, wheat, rice, 

### 17 bean, and soyb ean declined by 5.3, 8.9, 9.7, 17.5, 19, and 7.7% respectively, relative to 

### 18 CF air. At approximately 64 ppb O 3 , declines were 11.9, 12.5, 21.1, 37.5, 41.4, and 

### 19

21.6%. Grantz et al. (2006 ) reported Relative Growth Rate (RGR) rather than growth, 

### 20 and did not report O 3 exposure values in a way that would allow calculation of mean 

### 21 exposure for e ach of the three categories of plants for which RGR changes are reported. 

### 22 All studies used only two levels of exposure, with CF air as the lower one, and most used 

### 23 elevated exposure in the range of 40 to 70 ppb. Decline in RGR was 8.2% for the 34 

### 24

herbaceou s dicots, 4.5% for the 21 herbaceous monocots, and 17.9% for the 5 tree 

### 25 species. Finally, Wittig et al. (2009 ) divided the studies analyzed into three classes of 

### 26 comparisons: CF versus ambient, CF versus elevated, and ambient versus el evated, but 

### 27 reported comparisons between three average levels of exposure besides CF: 40 ppb, 

### 28

64 ppb, and 97 ppb. Corresponding decreases in total biomass relative to CF were 7, 17, 

### 29

and 17%. 

### 30

These meta

- analyses provide very strong confirmation of EPA’s co nclusions from 

### 31 previous O 3 AQCDs: compared to lower levels of ambient O 3 , current levels in many 

### 32 locations are having a substantial detrimental effect on the growth and yield of a wide 

### 33 variety of crops and natural vegetation. They also confirm strongly tha t decreases in 

### 34 growth and yield continue at exposure levels higher than current ambient levels. 

### 35 However, direct comparisons with the predictions of exposure

- response models that use 

### 36

concentration

- weighted cumulative metrics are difficult. 

### 37

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 148 June 2012 9.6.3.5 Additional expos ure - response data

The studies summarized in Table 9

- 17 and Table 9

- 18 contain growth or yield exposure



### 1 response data at too few levels of exposure for exposure

- response models, and/or used 

### 2 metrics other than W126. These tables update Tables AX9

- 16 through AX9

- 19 of the 

### 3

2006 O 3 AQCD. 

### 4

9.6.4 Summary

None of t he information on effects of O 3 on vegetation published since the 2006 O 3 

### 5 AQCD has modified the assessment of quantitative exposure

- response relationships that 

### 6 was presented in that document. This assessment updates the 2006 exposure

- response 

### 7 models by com puting them using the W126 metric, cumulated over 90 days. Almost all 

### 8 of the experimental research on the effects of O 3 on growth or yield of plants published 

### 9 since 2006 used only two levels of exposure. In addition, hourly O 3 concentration data 

### 10

that would allow calculations of exposure using the W126 metric are generally 

### 11 unavailable. However, two long

- term experiments, one with a crop species (soybean), 

### 12 one with a tree species (aspen), have produced data that can be used to validate the 

### 13

exposure

- response m odels presented in the 2006 O 3 AQCD, and methodology used to 

### 14

derive them. 

### 15

Quantitative characterization of exposure

- response in the 2006 O 3 AQCD was based on 

### 16 experimental data generated for that purpose by the National Crop Loss Assessment 

### 17
Network (NCLAN) and EPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research 

### 18 Laboratory, Western Ecology Division (NHEERL

- WED) projects, using OTCs to expose 

### 19 crops and trees seedling to O 3 . In recent years, yield and growth results for two of the 

### 20 species that had provided extensive exposure

- response information in those projects have 

### 21 become available from studies that used FACE technology, which is intended to provide 

### 22

conditions much closer to natural environments ( Pregitzer et al., 2008 ; Morgan et a l., 

### 23

2006 ; Morgan et al., 2004 ; Dickson et al., 2000 ) . The robust methods that were used 

### 24 previou sly with exposure measured as SUM06 were applied to the NCLAN and 

### 25

NHEERL

- WED data with exposure measured as W126, in order to derive single

- species 

### 26 median models for soybean and aspen from studies involving different genotypes, years, 

### 27

and locations. The re sulting models were used to predict the change in yield of soybean 

### 28 and biomass of aspen between the two levels of exposure reported in recent FACE 

### 29 experiments. Results from these new experiments were exceptionally close to predictions 

### 30

from the models. The accuracy of model predictions for two widely different plant 

### 31 species provides support for the validity of the corresponding multiple

- species models for 

### 32 crops and trees in the NCLAN and NHEERL

- WED projects. However, variability among 

### 33

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 149 June 2012 species in those projec ts indicates that the range of sensitivity is likely quite wide. This 

### 1 was confirmed by a recent experiment with cottonwood in a naturally occurring gradient 

### 2 of exposure ( Gregg et al., 2006 ) , which established the occurrence of species with 

### 3 responses substantially more severe under currently existing conditions than are predicted 

### 4 by the median model for mu ltiple species. 

### 5

Results from several meta

- analyses have provided approximate values for responses of 

### 6 yield of soybean, wheat, rice and other crops under broad categories of exposure, relative 

### 7

to charcoal

- filtered air ( Ainsworth, 2008 ; Feng et al., 2008b ; Morgan et al., 2003 )

. 

### 8
Likewise, Feng and Kobayashi (2009 ) have summarized yield data for six crop species 

### 9

unde r various broad comparative exposure categories, while Wittig et al. (2009 ) reviewed 

### 10 263 studies that reported effects on tree biomass. However, these analyses have proved 

### 11 difficult to compare with exposure

- response models, especially given that exposure was 

### 12 not expressed in the same W126 metric. 

### 13

Table 9

- 17 Summary of studies of effects of ozone exposure on growth and yield of agricultural crops.

Species Facility

Location Exposure Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Percent Change from CF (Percent Change

from Ambient) Reference

Alfalfa ( Medicago sativa ) OTC; 0.27m 3 pots Federico, Italy 2 yr, 2005, 2006 AOT40: CF 0 ppm

- h

13.9 ppm

- h (2005), 10.1 ppm

- h (2006) (NaCl: 0.29, 0.65, 0.83, 1.06 deciSiemens/meter) Total shoot yield n.s. (N/A) Maggio et al. (2009 )

Bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris I. cv Borlotto) OTC; ground

planted Curno, Italy 3 months, 2006 Seasonal AOT40: CF (0.5 ppm

- h); ambient (4.6 ppm

- h) (N/A) # Seeds per plant;

100

- seed weight - 33 (N/A) n.s. (N/A) Gerosa et al. (2009 )

Big Blue Stem ( Andropogon gerardii )

OTC

Alabama 4 months, 2003 12

- h avg: CF (14 ppb), Ambient (29 ppb), Elevated (71 ppb) (N/A) Final harvest biomass;

RVF n.s. (n.s.)

- 7 (

- 7) Lewis et al. (2006 )

Brassica napus cv. Westar

Growth chambers

Finland 17

- 26 days 8

- h avg:
CF (0 ppb), 100 ppb (Bt/non

- Bt; herbivory) Shoot biomass

- 30.70 (N/A) Himanen et al. (2009b )

Corn ( Zea mays cv. Chambord)

OTC

France 33 days AOT40 ppm

- h: 1.1; 1.3; 4.9; 7.2; 9.3; 12.8 (N/A) Total above

gr ound biomass N/A (Highest treatment caused

- 26% change) Leitao et al. (2007a )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 150 June 2012 Species Facility

Location Exposure Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Percent Change from CF (Percent Change

from Ambient) Reference

Cotto n cv. Pima OTC; 9

- L pots San Joaquin Valley, CA 8 weeks 12

- h avg: 12.8 ± 0.6; 79.9 ± 6.3; 122.7 ± 9.7 (N/A) Above

- ground biomass - 76 (n.s.) Grantz and Shrestha (2006 )

Eastern Gamagrass ( Tripsacum dactyloides )

OTC

Alabama 4 months, 2003 12

- h avg: CF (14ppb), Ambient (29 ppb), Elevated (71 ppb) (N/A) Final harvest biomass;

RVF +68 (+42);

- 17 (

- 12) Lewis et al. (2006 )

Grapevine ( Vitis vinivera )

OTC

Austria 3 yr, May

- Oct AOT40 ppm

- h: CF (0), Ambient (7

- 20), Elevated. 1 (20

- 30), Elevated. 2 (38

- 48) Total fruit yield/ Sugar yield - 20 to

- 80 in different yr (

- 20 to

- 90 in different yr) Soja et al. (2004 )

Mustard ( Brassica campestris ) Chambers;

7.5

- cm pots 10 days CF &

67.8 ppb for 7 h (N/A) Seeds/plant n.s. (N/A) Black et al. (2007 )

Oilseed Rape ( Brassica napus )

OTC Yangtze Delta, China 39 days Daily avg: 100 ppb, one with diurnal variation and one wit h constant concentration (N/A) Biomass and pods per plant Diurnal variability reduced both biomass and pod number more than constant fumigation (N/A) Wang et al. (2008 )

Peanut ( Arachis hypogaea )

O TC Raleigh, NC 3 yr 12

- h avg: CF (22 ppb), Ambient (46 ppb), Elevated (75ppb) (CO 2 : 375 ppm; 548 ppm; 730 ppm) Yield (seed weight, g/m) - 33 (

- 8) Burke y et al. (2007 )

Poa pratensis

OTC Braunschweig, Germany 2000

- 2002: 4

- 5 weeks in the Spring 8

- h avg: CF+25 (21.7), NF+50 (73.1) (Competition) Total biomass (g DW/pot) N/A (n.s.) Bender et al. (2006 )

Potato ( Solanum tuberosum ) OTC; CHIP

6 northern European locations 1988,1999. Emergence to harvest AOT40:CF (0); Ambient (0.27

- 5.19); NF (0.002

- 2.93) NF+ (3.10

- 24.78 (N/A) Tuber yield averaged across 5 field

- sites;

Tuber starch content regressed against [O 3 ] report sig. ± slope with increasing [O 3 ] N/A (

- 27%

- +27%, most comparisons n.s.) Linear regression slope = - 0.0098) Vandermeiren et al. (2005 )

Rice ( Oryza sativa )

OTC Raleigh, NC 1997

- 1998, June

September 12

- h mean ppb: CF (27.5), Elevated (74.8) (CO 2) Total biomass; Seed yield - 25(N/A)

- 13 to 20 (N/A) Reid and Fiscus (2008 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 151 June 2012 Species Facility

Location Exposure Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Percent Change from CF (Percent Change

from Ambient) Reference

Rice ( Oryza sativa ) 20 Asian cultivars

OTC

Gunma Prefecture, Japan 2008 growing

season Daily avg (ppb): CF (2), 0.8×ambient (23);

1 ×ambient (28); 1.5×ambient (42); 2×ambient (57) (Cultivar comparisons) Yield From n.s. to

- 30 across all cultivars Sawada and Kohno (2009 )

Seminatural grass

FACE
Le Mouret, Switzerland 5 yr Seasonal AOT40: Ambient (0.1

- 7.2 ppm

- h); Elevated. (1.8

- 24.1 ppm

- h) (N/A) Relative annual yield N/A (2×faster decrease in yield/yr) Volk et al. (2006 )

Soybean OTC; CRA Bari, Italy 2003

- 2005 growing

seasons Seasonal AOT40 ppm

- h: CF (0), Ambient (3.4), High (9.0) (Drought) Yield

- 46 (

- 9) Bou Jaoudé et al. (2008b )

Soybean ( Glycine

max cv. 93B15) SoyFACE
Urbana, IL 2002, 2003 growing

seasons 8

- h avg: Ambient (62 & 50 ppb), Elevated (75 & 63 ppb) (N/A) Yield N/A (

- 15 in 2002;

- 25 in 2003) Morgan et al. (2006 )

Soybean ( Glycine

max cv. Essex) Chambers; 21 L Raleigh, NC 2×3 months 12

- h avg: CF (28),

El evated (79), Elevated flux (112) (CO 2 : 365 & 700) Seed mass per plant - 30 (N/A) Booker and Fiscus (2005 )

Soybean ( Gly cine

max cv. Essex) OTCs; 21

- L pots Raleigh, NC 2×3 months 12

- h avg: CF (18); Elevated (72) (CO 2 : 367 & 718) Seed mass per plant - 34 (N/A) Booker et al. (2004b )

Soybean ( Glycine

max cv. Tracaja) Chambers; pots

Brazil 20 days 12

- h avg: CF & 30 ppb (N/A) Biomass

- 18 (N/A) Bulbovas et al. (2007 )

Soybean ( Glycine

max ) 10 cultivars SoyFACE
Urbana, IL 2007 & 2008 8

- h avg: Ambient (46.3 & 37.9), Elevated (82.5 & 61.3) (Cultivar comparisons) Yield N/A (

- 17.20) Betzelberger et al. (2010 )

Spring Wheat ( Triticum aestivum cv. Minaret; Satu; D rabant; Dragon)

OTCs Belgium, Finland, & Sweden 1990

- 2006 Seasonal AOT40s ranged from 0 to16 ppm

- h (N/A) Seed protein content;
1,000

- seed weight regressed across all experiments N/A (significant negative correlation) N/A (sig negative correlation) Piikki et al. (20 08b )

Strawberry ( Fragaria x

ananassa Duch. Cv Korona & Elsanta)

Growth chambers Bonn, Germany 2 months 8

- h avg: CF (0 ppb) & Elevated (78 ppb) (N/A) Fruit yield (weight/plant) - 16 (N/A) Keutgen et al. (2005 )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 152 June 2012 Species Facility

Location Exposure Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Percent Change from CF (Percent Change

from Ambient) Reference

Sugarbeet ( Beta vulgaris cv. Patriot)

OTC Belgium 2003, 2004 ; 5 months 8

- h avg: Ambient (36 ppb); Elevated (62 ppb) (N/A) Sugar yield N/A (

- 9) De Temmerman et al. (2007 )

Sugarcane ( Saccharum spp )

CSTR San Joaquin Valley, CA 2007; 11

- 13 weeks. 12

- h avg: CF (4 ppb); Ambient (58); Elevated (147) (N/A) Total biomass (g/plant) - 40 (

- 30) Grantz and Vu (2009 )

Sweet Potato

Growth chambers Bonn, Germany 4 weeks 8

- h avg: CF (0 ppb), Ambient (<40 ppb) Elevated (255 ppb) (N/A) Tuber weight

- 14 (

- 11.5) Keutgen et al. (2008 )

Tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum )

OTC Valencia, Spain 133 day s in 1998 8

- h mean ppb: CF 16.3, NF 30.1,

NF+ 83.2 (Various cultivars; early & late harvest) Yield n.s (n.s.) Dalstein and Vas (2005 )

Trifolium Subterraneum OTC; 2.5

- L pots Madrid, Spain 29 days 12

- h avg: CF (<7.9 ± 6.3); Ambient (34 .4 ± 10.8); Elevated (56.4 ± 22.3) (N: 5, 15 & 30 kg/ha) Above

- ground biomass - 45 (

- 35) Sanz et al. (2005 )

Watermelon ( Citrullus lanatus)

OTC Valencia, Spain 2000, 2001. 90 days AOT40: CF (0 ppm

- h) Ambient (5.7 ppm

- h), Elevated (34.1 ppm

- h) (N:0, 14.0 & 29.6 g/pot) total fruit yield (kg) n.s. (54) Calatayud et al. (2006 )

Yel low Nutsedge OTC; 9

- L pots San Joaquin Valley, C A 8 weeks 12

- h avg: 12.8 ± 0.6; 79.9 ± 6.3; 122.7 ± 9.7 (N/A) above

- ground biomass n.s. (n.s.) Grantz and Shrestha (2006 )

In studies where variables other than O 3 were included in the experimental design, response to O 3 is only provided for the control level of those variables.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 153 June 2012 Table 9

- 18 Summary of studies of effects of ozone exposure on growth of natural vegetation.

Species Facility

Location Exposure

Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Response Reference

Yellow nutsedge ( Cyperus esculentus )

CSTR San Joaquin Valley , CA 53 days in 2008 12

- h mean ppb: CF (4); CF+ (60);

CF2+ (115) Above

- ground biomass; tubers (g/plant) ns; CF(4.1) CF+(3.9) CF2+(2.7) Grantz et al. (2010a )

35 herbaceous species

OTC Corvallis, OR 1999

- 2002, May

- August 4

- yr avg; yearly W126 ppm

- h: CF (0), CF+ (21), CF 2+ (49.5) Total community above

- ground biomass (35 species) after 4 years CF (459 g/m 2 ), CF+ (457 g/m 2 ), CF2+ (398 g/m 2 ) Pfleeger et al. (2010 )

Highbush blackberry ( Rubus argutus )

OTC
Auburn, AL 2004, May

- August 12

- h mean ppb: CF (21.7), Ambient (32.3), Elevated (73.3) Vegetative regrowth after pruning CF (75.1 g/plant), Ambient (76.4 g/plant), Elevated (73.1 g/plant) Ditchkoff et al. (2009 )

Horseweed ( Conyza canadensis )

CSTR San Joaquin Valley, CA 2005, 2 runs, 28 days each (July

- Aug, Sept) W126 ppm

- h: CF(0), CF+ (11), CF 2+ (30) (Glyphosate resistance) Total biomass (g/plant) Glyphosate sensitive: CF (0.354) CF+ (0.197) CF2+ (0.106) Glyphosate resistant: CF(0.510) CF+ (0.313) CF2+ (0.143) Grantz et al. (2008 )

Red Oak ( Quercus rubrum )

Forest sites

Look Rock & Twin Creeks Forests, TN 2001

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2001 (11.5), 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2001 in year 2002;2003 ) - 42.8%; +1% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Pine species

Forest sites
Look Rock Forest, TN 2001

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2001 (11.5), 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2001 in year 2002;2003) - 62.5%;

- 2.9% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 154 June 2012 Species Facility

Location Exposure

Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Response Reference

Hickory species

Forest sites
Look Rock Forest, TN 2001

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2001 (11.5), 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2001 in year 2002;2003) - 14%; +30% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Chestnut Oak ( Quercus prinus )

For est sites
Look Rock Forest, TN 2001

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2001 (11.5), 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2001 in year 2002;2003) +44%; +55% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Black Cherry ( Prunus rigida )

Forest sites Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2003 in year 2002) - 75% McLau ghlin et al. (2007a )

Shortleaf pine ( Pinus echinata )

Forest sites Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2003 in year 2002) - 16.8% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Hemlock ( Tsuga canadens is )

Forest sites Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2003 in year 2002) - 21.9% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Red Maple ( Acer rubrum )

Forest sites Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2003 in year 2002) - 59.6% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 155 June 2012 Species Facility

Location Exposure

Duration O 3 Exposure (Additional Treatment) Response Measured Response Reference

Yellow Poplar ( Liriodendron tulipifera )

Forest sites Look Rock, Oak Ridge, & Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2001 in years 2002; 2003) - 45.9%;

- 15.25% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Sugar Maple ( Acer saccharum )

Forest sites Twin Creeks Forest, TN 2002

- 2003, April

- October AOT60: 2002 (24.0), 2003 (11.7) (Observational study with multiple environmental variables) Annual circumference increment (change relative to 2003 in year 2002) - 63.8% McLaughlin et al. (2007a )

Trembling aspen ( Populus tremuloides ), 5 genotypes Aspen FACE
Rhinelander, WI 1998

- 2004, May

- October Cumulative avg 90

- day 12

- h W126.

Ambient 3.1 ppm

- h Elevated: 27.2 ppm

- h (Competition with birch, maple) main stem volume after 7 years Ambient: 6.22 dm 3 ;
Elevated: 4.73 dm 3 Kubiske et al. (2006 )

Hybrid Poplar ( Populus trichocarpa x Populus deltoides )

OTC Seattle, WA 20 03, 3 months Daily mean (μg/g): CF(<9), Elevated (85

- 128) Total biomass CF to elevated:

- 12.9% Woo and H inckley (2005 )

In studies where variables other than O 3 were included in the experimental design, response to O 3 is only provided for the control level of those variables.



## 9.7 Summary and C onclusions

Based on the evidence presented in Chapter 9 and summarized here, O 3 is causally related 

### 1 or likely to be causally related to effects observed on vegetation and ecosystems. The 

### 2

evidence for the se effects spans the entire continuum of biological organization, from the 

### 3 cellular and subcellular level to the whole plant, and up to ecosystem

- level processes, and 

### 4 includes evidence for effects at lower levels of organization, leading to effects at high er 

### 5 levels. Given the current state of knowledge, exposure indices that cumulate and 

### 6 differentially weight the higher hourly average concentrations and also include the mid



### 7 level values are the most appropriate for use in developing response functions and 

### 8

c omparing studies. The framework for causal determinations (see Preamble) has been 

### 9 applied to the body of scientific evidence to examine effects attributed to O 3 exposure 

### 10 collectively and the determinations are presented in Table 9

- 19

. 

### 11

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 156 June 2012 Table 9

- 19 Summary of ozone causal determinations for vegetation and ecosystem effects

Vegetation and Ecosystem Effects Concl usions from 2006 O 3 AQCD Conclusions from 2011 3rd Draft ISA

Visible Foliar Injury Effects on Vegetation Data published since the 1996 O 3 AQCD strengthen previous conclusions that there is strong evidence that current ambient O 3 concentrations cause impaired aesthetic quality of many native plants and trees by increasing foliar injury. Causal Relationship

Reduced Vegetation Growth Data published since the 1996 O 3 AQCD strengthen previous conclusions that there is strong evidence that current ambient O 3 concentrations cause decreased growth and biomass accumulation in annual, perennial and woody plants, including agronomic crops, annuals, shrubs, grasses, and trees. Causal Relationship

Reduced Productivity in Terrestrial Ecosyste ms There is evidence that O 3 is an important stressor of ecosystems and that the effects of O 3 on individual plants and processes are scaled up through the ecosystem, affecting net primary productivity. Causal Relationship

Reduced Carbon (C) Sequestration in Terrestrial Ecosystems Limited studies from previous review Likely to be a Causal Relationship

Reduced Yield and Quality of Agricultural Crops Data published since the 1996 O 3 AQCD strengthen previous conclusions that there is strong evidence that cur rent ambient O 3 concentrations cause decreased yield and/or nutritive quality in a large number of agronomic and forage crops. Causal Relationship

Alteration of Terrestrial Ecosystem Water Cycling Ecosystem water quantity may be affected by O 3 exposure at the landscape level. Likely to be a Causal Relationship

Alteration of Below

- ground Biogeochemical Cycles Ozone

- sensitive species have well known responses to O 3 exposure, including altered C allocation to below

- ground tissues, and altered rates of leaf a nd root production, turnover, and decomposition. These shifts can affect overall C and N loss from the ecosystem in terms of respired C, and leached aqueous dissolved organic and inorganic C and N. Causal Relationship

Alteration of Terrestrial Community C omposition Ozone may be affecting above

- and below

- ground community composition through impacts on both growth and reproduction. Significa nt changes in plant community composition resulting directly from O 3 exposure have been demonstrated. Likely to be a Causal Relationship

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 157 June 2012 

### References

Agrell, J; Kopper, BJ; McDonald, EP; Lindroth, RL. (2005). CO2 and O3 effects on host plant preferences of the forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma disstria). Global Change Biol 11: 588

- 599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.00924.x Ahlfors, R; Brosche, M; Kollist, H; Kangasjarvi, J. (2009). Nitric oxide modulates ozone

- induced cell death, hormone biosynthesis and gene expression in Arabid opsis thaliana. Plant J 58: 1

- 12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 313X.2008.03756.x Ahsan, N; Na njo, Y; Sawada, H; Kohno, Y; Komatsu, S. (2010). Ozone stress

- induced proteomic changes in leaf total soluble and chloroplast proteins of soybean reveal that carbon allocation is involved in adaptation in the early developmental stage. Proteomics 10: 26 05

- 2619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201000180 Ainsworth, EA. (2008). Rice production in a changing c limate: a meta

- analysis of responses to elevated carbon dioxide and elevated ozone concentration. Global Change Biol 14: 1642

- 1650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2008.01594.x Ainsworth, EA; Long, SP. (2005). What have we learned from 15 years of free

- air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta

- analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2 [Review]. New Phytol 165: 351

- 371. Ainsworth, EA; Rogers, A. (2007). The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: Mechanisms and environmental interactions [Review]. Plant Cell Environ 30: 258

- 270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2007.01641.x Alexis, A; Garcia, A; Nystrom, M; Rosenkranz, K. (2001a). The 2001 California almanac of emissions and air quality. Sacremento, CA: California Air Resources Board. http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac01/almanac01.htm Allen, EB; Temple, PJ; Bytnerowicz, A; Arbaugh, MJ; Si rulnik, AG; Rao, LE. (2007). Patterns of understory diversity in mixed coniferous forests of southern California impacted by air pollution. ScientificWorldJournal 7: 247

- 263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2007.72 Alonso, R; Bermejo, V; Sanz, J; Valls, B; Elvira, S; Gimeno, BS. (2007). Stomatal conductance of semi

natural Mediterrane an grasslands: Implications for the development of ozone critical levels. Environ Pollut 146: 692

- 698. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.06.009 Amthor, JS. (1988). Growth and maintenance respiration in leaves of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) exposed to ozone in open

- top chambers in the field. New Phytol 110: 319

- 325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1988.tb00268.x Andersen, CP. (2003). Source

- sink balance and carbon allocation below gr ound in plants exposed to ozone. New Phytol 157: 213

- 228. Andersen, CP; Ritter, W; Gregg, J; Matyssek, R; Grams, TEE. (2010). Below

- ground carbon allocation i n mature beech and spruce trees following long

- term, experimentally enhanced O3 exposure in southern Germany. Environ Pollut 158: 2604

- 2609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.05.008 Andersen, CP; Wilson, R; Plocher, M; Hogsett, WE. (1997). Carry

- over effects of ozone on root growth and carbohydrate concentrations of ponderosa pine seedlings. Tree Physiol 17: 805

- 811. Andrews, KM; Gibbons, JW; Jochimsen, DM. (2008). Ecological effects of roads on amphibians and reptiles: A literature review. In JC Mitch ell; REJ Brown; B Bartholomew (Eds.), Urban Herpetology (pp. 121

- 143). Salt Lake City: Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. http://www.uga.edu/srel/Reprint/3091.htm Aneja, MK; Sharma, S; Fleischmann, F; Stich, S; Heller, W; Bahnweg, G; Munch, JC; Schloter, M. (2007). Influence of ozone on litter quality and its subsequent effects on the initial structure of colonizing microbial communities. Microb Ecol 54: 151

- 160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00248

- 006

- 9183

- 0 Arbaugh, M; Bytnerowicz, A; Grulke, N; Fenn, M; Poth, M; Temple, P; Miller, P. (2003). Photochemical smog effects in mixed conifer forests along a natural gradient of ozone and nitrogen deposition in the San Bernardino Mountains. Environ Int 29: 401

- 406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0160

- 4120(02)00176

- 9

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 158 June 2012 Arbaugh, MJ; Miller, PR; Carroll, JJ; Takemoto, BL; Proctor, T. (1998). Relationships of ozone exposure to pine injury in the Sierra Nevada and San Bernardino Mountains of California, USA. Environ Pollut 101: 291

- 301. http://dx.d oi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(98)00027

- X Ariyaphanphitak, W; Chidthaisong, A; Sarobol, E; Bashkin, VN; Towprayoon, S. (2005). Effects of elevated ozone concentrati ons on Thai Jasmine rice cultivars (Oryza sativa L.). Water Air Soil Pollut 167: 179

- 200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 005

- 8650

- 4 Ashmore, M; Emberson, L; Karlsson, PE; Pleijel, H. (2004a). Introduction for ozone deposition special issue. Atmos Environ 38: 2211

- 2212. Ashmore, M; Emberson, L; Karlsson, PE; Pleijel, H. (2004b). New directions: A new generation of ozone critical levels for the protection of vegetation in Europe (correspondence). Atmos Environ 38: 2213

- 2214. Ashmore, MR. (2002). Effects of oxidants at the whole plant and community level. In JNB Bell; M Treshow (Eds.), Air pollution and plant life (pp. 89

- 118). London: Wiley. Ashmore, MR; Bell, JNB; Mimmack, A. (1988). Crop growth along a gradient of ambient air pollution. Environ Pollut 53: 99

- 121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(88)90028

- 0 Avnery, S; Mauzerall, DL; Liu, J; Horowitz, LW. (2011a). Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone

ex posure: 1. Year 2000 crop production losses and economic damage. Atmos Environ 45: 2284

- 2296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.11.045 Avnery, S; Mauzerall, DL; Liu, J; Horowitz, LW. (2011b). Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone exposure: 2. Year 2030 potential crop production losses and economic damage under two scenarios of O3 pollution. Atmos Environ 45: 2297

- 2309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.01.002 Awmack, CS; Harrington, R; Lindroth, RL. (2004). Aphid individual performance may not predict population responses to elevated CO2 or O3. Global Change Biol Biol.10: 1414

- 1423. Awmack, CS; Mondor, EB; Lindroth, RL. (2007). Forest understory clover populations in enriched CO2 and O

- 3 atmospheres: Interspecific, intraspecific, and indirect effects. Environ Exp Bot 59: 340

- 346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2006.04.003 Bagard, M; Le Thiec, D; Delacote, E; Hasenfratz

- Sa uder, MP; Banvoy, J; Gerard, J; Dizengremel, P; Jolivet,
Y. (2008). Ozone

- induced changes in photosynthesis and photorespiration of hybrid poplar in relation to the developmental stage of the leaves. Physiol Plant 134: 559

- 574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2008.01160.x Baier, M; Kandlbinder, A; Golldack, D; Dietz, K. (2005). Oxidative s tress and ozone: Perception; signalling and response. Plant Cell Environ 28: 1012

- 1020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2005.01326.x Baldantoni, D; Fagnano, M; Alfani, A. (2011). Tropospheric ozone effects on chemical composition and decomposition rate of Quercus ilex L. leaves. Sci Total Environ 409: 979

- 984. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.11.022 Ball, GR; Palmer

- Brown, D; Fuhrer, J; Skarby, L; Gimeno, BS; Mills, G. (2000). Identification of non

- linear influences on the seasonal ozone dose

- response of sensitive and resistant clover clones using artificial neural networks. Ecol Modell 129: 153

- 168. Balls, GR; Palmer

- Brown, D; Sanders, GE. (1996). Investigating microclimatic influences on ozone injury in clover (Trifolium subterraneum) using artificial neural networks. New Phytol 132: 271

- 280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1996.tb01846.x Bandeff, JM; Pregitzer, KS; Loya, WM; Holmes, WE; Zak, DR. (2006). Overstory c ommunity composition and elevated atmospheric CO2 and O3 modify understory biomass production and nitrogen acquisition. Plant Soil 282: 251

- 259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 005

- 5930

- 0 Barnes, J; Zheng, Y; Lyons, T. (2002). Plant resistance to ozone: The role of ascorbate. In K Omasa; H Saji; S Youssefian; N Kondo (Eds.), Air pollution and plant biotec hnology

- Prospects for phytomonitoring and phytoremediation (pp. 235252). Tokyo: Springer

- Verlag. Bassin, S; Volk, M; Fuhrer, J. (2007a). Factors affecting the ozone sensitivity of temperate European grasslands: An overview. Environ Pollut 146: 678

- 691. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.06.010 Bassin, S; Volk, M; Suter, M; Buchmann, N; Fuhrer, J. (2007b). Nitrogen deposition but not ozone affects productivity and community composition of subalpine grassland after 3 yr of treatment. New Phytol 175: 523

- 534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2007.02140.x Bassin, S; Werner, RA; Sorgel, K; Volk, M; Buchmann, N; Fuhrer, J. (2009). Effects of combined ozone and nitrogen deposition on the in situ properties of eleven key plant species of a subalpine pasture. Oecologia 158: 747

- 756. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 008

- 1191

- y

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 159 June 2012 Bauer, MR; Hultman, NE; Panek, JA; Goldstein, AH. (2000). Ozone deposition to a ponderosa pine plantation in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (CA): A comparison of two different climatic years. J Geophys Res 105: 22,123

- 122,136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900168 Bender, J; Muntifering, RB; Lin, JC; Weigel, HJ. (2006). Growth and nutritive quality of Poa pratensis as influenced by ozone and competition. Environ Pollut 142: 109

- 115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.09.012 Bender, J; Weigel, HJ. (2011). Changes in atmospheric chemistry and crop health: A review [Review]. Agron Sustain Dev 31: 81

- 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/agro/2010013 Bennett, JP; Jepsen, EA; Roth, JA. (2006). Field responses of Prunus serotina and Asclepias syriaca to ozone around southern Lake Michigan. Environ Pollut 142: 354

- 366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2 005.09.024 Benoit, LF; Skelly, JM; Moore, LD; Dochinger, LS. (1982). Radial growth reductions of Pinus strobus L correlated with foliar ozone sensitivity as an indicator of ozone

- induced losses in eastern forests. Can J For Res 12: 673

- 678. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/x82

- 101 Bergweiler, CJ; Manning, WJ. (1999). Inhibition of flowering and reproductive success in spreading dogbane (Apocynum androsaemifolium) by exposure to ambient ozone. Environ Pollut 105: 333

- 339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(99)00044

- 5 Bergweiler, CJ; Manning, WJ; Chevone, BI. (2008). Seasonal and diurnal gas exchange differences in ozone

sen sitive common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca L.) in relation to ozone uptake. Environ Pollut 152: 403

- 415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.019 Bernacchi, CJ; Leaky, ADB; Heady, LE; Morgan, PB; Dohleman, FG; McGrath, JM; Gillespie, KM; Wittig, VE; Rogers, A; Long, SP; Ort, DR. (2006). Hourly and seasonal variati on in photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of soybean grown at future CO2 and ozone concentrations for 3 years under fully open

- air field conditions. Plant Cell Environ 29: 2077

- 2090. http ://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2006.01581.x Bernacchi, CJ; Morgan, PB; Ort, DR; Long, SP. (2005). The growth of soybean under free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) stimulates photosynthesis while decreasing in vivo Rubisco capacity. Planta 220: 434

- 446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425

- 004

- 1320

- 8 Betzelberger, AM; Gillespie, KM; McGrath, JM; Koester, RP; Nelson, RL; Ainsworth, EA. (2010). Effects of chronic elevated ozone concentration on antioxidant capacity, photosynthesis and seed yield of 10 soybean cultivars. Plant Cell Environ 33: 1569

- 1581. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2010.02165.x Bidart

- Bouza t, MG; Imeh

- Nathaniel, A. (2008). Global change effects on plant chemical defenses against insect herbivores. J Integr Plant Biol 50: 1339

- 1354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744

- 7909.2008. 00751.x Billings, WD. (1978). Plants and the ecosystem. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. Biswas, DK; Xu, H; Li, YG; Sun, JZ; Wang, XZ; Han, XG; Jiang, GM. (2008). Genotypic differences in leaf biochemical, physiological and growth responses to ozone in 20 winter wheat cultivars released over the past 6 0 years. Global Change Biol 14: 46

- 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2007.01477.x Black, VJ; Black, CR; Roberts, JA; Stewart, CA. (2000). Impact of ozone on the reproductive development of plants. New Phytol 147: 421

- 447. Black, VJ; Stewart, CA; R oberts, JA; Black, CR. (2007). Ozone affects gas exchange, growth and reproductive development in Brassica campestris (Wisconsin Fast Plants). New Phytol 176: 150

- 163. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1469

- 8137.2007.02163.x Black, VJ; Stewart, CA; Roberts, JA; Black, CR. (2010). Direct effects of ozone on reproductive development in Plantago major L. populations differing in sensitivity. Environ Exp Bot 69: 121

- 128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.04.006 Blande, JD; Holopainen, JK; Li, T. (2010). Air pollution impedes plant

- to

- plant communication by volatiles. Ecol Lett 13: 1172

- 1181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461

- 02 48.2010.01510.x Bohler, S; Bagard, M; Oufir, M; Planchon, S; Hoffmann, L; Jolivet, Y; Hausman, JF; Dizengremel, P; Renaut, J. (2007). A DIGE analysis of develo ping poplar leaves subjected to ozone reveals major changes in carbon metabolism. Proteomics 7: 1584

- 1599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200600822 Bohler, S; Sergeant, K; Lefèvre, I; Jolivet, Y; Hoffmann, L; Renaut, J; Dizengremel, P; Hausman, JF. (2010). Differential impact of chronic ozone exposure on expanding and fully expanded poplar leaves. Tree Physi ol 30: 1415

- 1432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpq082

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 160 June 2012 Bonn, B; Von Kuhlmann, R; Lawrence, MG. (200 4). High contribution of biogenic hydroperoxides to secondary organic aerosol formation. Geophys Res Lett 31: L10108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003GL019172 Booker, FL; Burkey, KO; Overmyer, K; Jones, AM. (2004a). Differential responses of G

- protein Arabidopsis thaliana mutants to ozone. New Phytol 162: 633

- 641. Booker, FL; Burkey, KO; Pursley, WA; Heagle, AS. (2007). Elevated carbon dioxide and ozone effects on peanut: I. Gas

- exchange, biomass, and leaf chemistry. Crop Sci 47: 1475

- 1487. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.08.0537 Booker, FL; Fiscus, EL. (2005). The role o f ozone flux and antioxidants in the suppression of ozone injury by elevated CO2 in soybean. J Exp Bot 56: 2139

- 2151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eri214 Booker, FL; Fiscus, EL; Miller, JE. (2004b). Combined effects of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and ozone on soybean whole

- plant water use. Environ Manage 33: S355

- S362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267

- 003

- 9144

- z Booker, FL; Muntifering, R; McGrath, M; Burkey, K; Decoteau, D; Fiscus, E; Manning, W; Krupa, S ; Chappelka, A; Grantz, D. (2009). The ozone component of global change: Potential effects on agricultural and horticultural plant yield, product quality and interactions with invasive species. J Integr Plant Biol 51: 337

- 351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744

- 7909.2008.00805.x Booker, FL; Prior, SA; Torbert, HA; Fiscus, EL; Pursley, WA; Hu, S. (2 005). Decomposition of soybean grown under elevated concentrations of CO2 and O3. Global Change Biol 11: 685

- 698. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.00939.x Booker, FL; Reid, CD; Brunschon

- Harti, S; Fiscus, EL; Miller, JE. (1997). Photosynthesis and photorespiration in soybean [Glycine max (L) Merr] chronically exposed to elevated carbon dio xide and ozone. J Exp Bot 48: 1843

- 1852. Borowiak, K; Rucinska

- Sobkowiak, R; Rymer, K; Gwozdz, EA; Zbierska, J. (2009). Biochemical markers of tropospheric oz one: Experimentation with test

- plants. Polish Journal of Ecology 57: 3

- 14. Bou Jaoudé, M; Katerji, N; Mastrorilli, M; Rana, G. (2008a). Analysis of the effect of ozone on soybean in the Mediterranean region I: The consequences on crop

- water status. Eur J Agron 28: 508

- 518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2007.09.002 Bou Jaoudé, M; Katerji, N; Mastrorilli, M; Rana, G. (2008b). Analysis of the ozone effect on soybean in the Mediterranean region II. The consequences on growth, yield an d water use efficiency. Eur J Agron 28: 519

- 525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2007.09.001 Broadmeadow, MSJ; Jackson, SB. (2000). Growth responses of Quercus petraea, Fraxinus excelsior and Pinus sylvestris to elevated carbon dioxide, ozone and water supply. New Phytol 146: 437

- 451. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2000.00665.x Brook, JR; DiGiovanni, F; Cakmak, S; Meyers, TP. (1997). Estimation of dry deposition velocity using inferential mod els and site

- specific meteorology

-- uncertainty due to siting of meteorological towers. Atmos Environ 31: 3911

- 3919. Bulbovas, P; de Souza, SR; de Moraes, RM; Lui zao, F; Artaxo, P. (2007). Soybean 'Tracaja' seedlings exposed to ozone under controlled conditions. Pesqui Agropecu Bras 42: 641

- 646. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100

- 204X2007000500005 Burkey, KO; Booker, FL; Pursley, WA; Heagle, AS. (2007). Elevated carbon dioxide and ozone effects on peanut: II. Seed yield and quality. Crop Sci 47: 1488

- 1497. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.08.0538 Burkey, KO; Eason, G; Fiscus, EL. (2003). Factors that affect leaf extracellular ascorbic acid content and redox status. Physiol Plant 117: 51

- 57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1399

- 3054.2003.1170106.x Burkey, KO; Neufeld, HS; Souza, L; Chappelka, AH; Davison, AW. (2006). Seasonal profiles of leaf ascorbic acid content and redox state in ozone

- sensitive wildflowers. En viron Pollut 143: 427

- 434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.12.009 Bytnerowicz, A; Arbaugh, M; Schilling, S; Fraczek, W; Alexander, D. (2008). Ozone distribution and phytotoxic potential in mixed conifer forests of the San Bernardino Mountains, Southern California. Environ Pollut 155: 398

- 408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.01.046 Caird, MA; Richards, JH; Donovan, LA. (2007). Nighttime stomatal conductance and transpiration in C

- 3 and C

- 4 plants. Plant Physiol 143: 4

- 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.092940 Cal EPA (California Environmental Protection Agency). (2010). Air quality data branch main page. Available online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/aqdpage.htm (accesse d January 28, 2011).

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 161 June 2012 Calatayud, A; Alvarado, JW; Barreno, E. (2002). Similar effects of ozone on four cultivars of lettuce in open top chambers during winter. Photosynthetica 40: 195

- 200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021333305592 Calatayud, A; Pomares, F; Barreno, E. (2006). Interactions between nitrogen fertilization and ozone in watermelon cultivar Reina de Corazones in open

- top chambers. Effects on chlorophyll alpha fluorescence, lipid peroxidation, and yield. Photosynthetica 44: 93

- 101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11099

- 005

- 0163

- 2 Calatayud, V; Cervero, J; Sanz, MJ. (2007a). Foliar, physiologial and growth re sponses of four maple species exposed to ozone. Water Air Soil Pollut 185: 239

- 254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 007

- 9446

- 5 Calatayud, V; Sanz, MJ; Calvo, E; Cervero, J; Ansel, W; Klumpp, A. (2007b). Ozone biomonitoring with Bel

- W3 tobacco plants in the city of Valencia (Spain). Water Air Soil Pollut 183: 283

- 291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 007

- 9376

- 2 Campbell, SJ; Wanek, R; Coulston, JW. (2007). Ozone injury in west coast forests: 6 years of m onitoring

- Introduction. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Cannon, WN. (1990). Olfactory response of eastern spruce budworm larvae to red spruce needles exposed to acid rain and elevated levels of ozone. J Chem Ecol 16: 3255

- 3261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00982096 Carde, RT; Haynes, KF. (2004). Stucture of the pheromone communication channel in moths. In Advances in insect chemical ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511542664.009 Casteel, CL; O'Neill, BF; Zavala, JA; Bilgin, DD; Be renbaum, MR; DeLucia, EH. (2008). Transcriptional profiling reveals elevated CO2 and elevated O3 alter resistance of soybean (Glycine max) to Japanese beetles (Popillia japonica). Plant Cell Environ 31: 419

- 434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2008.01782.x Chapman, JA; King, JS; Pregitzer, KS; Zak, DR. (2005). Effects of elevated concentra tions of atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O

- 3 on decomposition of fine roots. Tree Physiol 25: 1501

- 1510. Chappelka, A; Skelly, J; Somers, G; Renfro, J; Hildebran d, E. (1999a). Mature black cherry used as a bioindicator of ozone injury. Water Air Soil Pollut 116: 261

- 266. Chappelka, A; Somers, G; Renfro, J. (1999b). Visible ozone injury on forest trees in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA. Water Air Soil Pollut 116: 255

- 260. Chappelka, AH. (2002). Reproductive devel opment of blackberry (Rubus cuneifolius) as influenced by ozone. New Phytol 155: 249

- 255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2002.00464.x Chappelka, AH; Neufeld, HS; Davison, AW; Somers, GL; Renfro, JR. (2003). Ozone injury on cutleaf coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata) and crown

- beard (Verbesina occidentalis) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Pollut 125: 53

- 60. Chappelka, AH; Samuelson, LJ. (1998). Ambient ozone effects on forest trees of the eastern United States: A review [Review]. New Ph ytol 139: 91

- 108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.1998.00166.x Chappelka, AH; Somers, GL; Re nfro, JR. (2007). Temporal patterns of foliar ozone symptoms on tall milkweed (Asclepias exaltata L) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Pollut 149: 358

- 365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.05.015 Chen, CW; Tsai, WT; Lucier, AA. (1998). A model of air

- tree

- soil system for ozone impact analysis. Ecol Modell 11 1: 207

- 222. Chen, Z; Gallie, DR. (2005). Increasing tolerance to ozone by elevating foliar ascorbic acid confers greater protection against ozone than increas ing avoidance. Plant Physiol 138: 1673

- 1689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.105.062000 Chen, Z; Wang, XK; Feng , ZZ; Xiao, Q; Duan, XN. (2009). Impact of elevated O3 on soil microbial community function under wheat crop. Water Air Soil Pollut 198: 189

- 198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 008

- 9838

- 1 Chen, Z; Wang, XK; Yao, FF; Zheng, FX; Feng, ZZ. (2010b). Elevated ozone changed soil microbial community in a rice paddy. Soil Sci Soc Am J 74: 829

- 837. http://dx.doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2009.0258 Cheng, FY; Burkey, KO; Robinson, JM; Booker, FL. (2007). Leaf extracellul ar ascorbate in relation to O3 tolerance of two soybean cultivars. Environ Pollut 150: 355

- 362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.01.022

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 162 June 2012 Cho, K; Shibato, J; Agrawal, GK; Jung, YH; Kubo, A; Jwa, NS; Tamogami, S; Satoh, K; Kikuchi, S; Higashi, T; Kimura, S; Saji, H; Tanaka, Y; Iwahashi, H; Masuo, Y; Rakwal, R. (2008). Integrated transcriptomics, pr oteomics, and metabolomics analyses to survey ozone responses in the leaves of rice seedling. J Proteome Res 7: 2980

- 2998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/pr800128q Christman, MA; Donovan, LA; Richards, JH. (2009). Magnitude of nighttime transpiration does not affect plant growth or nutrition in well

- watered Arabidopsis. Physiol Plant 136: 264

- 273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2009.01216.x Chung, HG; Zak, DR; Lilleskov, EA. (2006). Fungal community composition and metabolism under elevated CO2 and O3. Oecologia 147: 143

- 154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 005

- 0249

- 3 Colls, JJ; Unsworth, MH. (1992). Air pollution interactions with natural stressors. In JR Barker; DT Tingey (Eds.), Air pollution effects on biodiversity. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Cornelissen, T. (2011). Climate change and its effects on terrestrial insects and herbivory patterns. Neotrop Entomol 40: 155

- 163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1519

- 566X2011000200001 Costa, DL; Folinsbee, LJ; Raub, JA; Tilton, B; Tingey, DT. (1992). Summary of select ed new information on effects of ozone on health and vegetation: Supplement to 1986 air quality criteria for ozone and other photochemical oxidants. (EPA/600/8

- 88/105F). Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=31093 Coulston, JW; Smith, GC; Smith, WD. (2003). Region al assessment of ozone sensitive tree species using bioindicator plants. Environ Monit Assess 83: 113

- 127. Crous, KY; Vandermeiren, K; Ceulemans, R. (2006). P hysiological responses to cumulative ozone uptake in two white clover (Trifolium repens L. cv. Regal) clones with different ozone sensitivity. Environ Exp Bot 58: 169

- 179. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1016/j.envexpbot.2005.07.007 D'Haese, D; Vandermeiren, K; Asard, H; Horemans, N. (2005). Other factors than apoplastic ascorbate contribute to the differentia l ozone tolerance of two clones of Trifolium repens L. Plant Cell Environ 28: 623

- 632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2005.01308.x Dalstein, L; Vas, N. (2005). Ozone concentrations and ozone

- induced symptoms on coastal and alpine mediterranean pines in southern France. Water Air Soil Pollut 160: 181

- 195. Dammgen, U; Grunhage, L; Haenel, HD; Jager, HJ. (1993). Climate and stress in ecotoxicology: A coherent system of definitions and terms. J Appl Bot Food Qual 67: 157

- 162. Darbah, JNT; Kubiske, ME; Neilson, N; Oksanen, E; Vaapavuori, E; Karnosky, DF. (2007). Impacts of elevated atmospheric CO2 and O3 on paper birch (Betula papyrifera): Reproductive fitness. ScientificWorldJournal 7: 240

- 246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2007.42 Darbah, JNT; Kubiske, ME; Nelson, N; Oksanen, E; Vapaavuori, E; Kamosky, DF. (2008). Effects of decadal exposure to interacting elevated CO2 and/or O

- 3 on paper birch (Betula papyr ifera) reproduction. Environ Pollut 155: 446

- 452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.01.033 David son, A. (1993). Update of ozone trends in California's South Coast Air Basin. Air Waste 43: 226

- 227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1073161X.1993.10467130 Davis, DD. (2007a). Ozone

- induced symptoms on vegetation within the Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge in Maine. Northeast Nat 14: 403

- 414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1656/1092

- 6194(2007)14[403:OSOVWT]2.0.CO;2 Davis, DD. (2007b). Ozone injury to plants within the Seney National Wildl ife Refuge in northern Michigan. Northeast Nat 14: 415

- 424. Davis, DD. (2009). Ozone

- induced stipple on plants in the Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge, So uth Carolina. Southeastern Naturalist 8: 471

- 478. Davis, DD; Orendovici, T. (2006). Incidence of ozone symptoms on vegetation within a National Wildlife Refuge in New Jersey, USA. Environ Pollut 143: 555

- 564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.10.051 Daws on, TE; Burgess, SS; Tu, KP; Oliveira, RS; Santiago, LS; Fisher, JB; Simonin, KA; Ambrose, AR. (2007). Nighttime transpiration in woody plants from contrasting ecosystems. Tree Physiol 27: 561

- 575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/27.4.561 de Lourdes de Bauer, M; Hernandez

- Tejeda, T. (2007). A review of ozone

- induced effects on the forests of central Mexico [Review]. Environ Pollut 147: 446

- 453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.12.020 De Temmerman, L; Legrand, G; Vandermeiren, K. (2007). Effects of ozone on sugar beet grown in open

- top chambers. Eur J Agron 26: 1

- 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2006.08.001

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 163 June 2012 Degl'Innocenti, E; Guidi, L; Soldatini, GF. (2007). Effects of elevated ozone on chlorophyll a fluorescence in symptomatic and asymptomatic leaves of two tomato genotypes. Biol Pl antarum 51: 313

- 321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10535

- 007

- 0061

- 5 Dermody, O; O'Neill, BF; Zangerl, AR; B erenbaum, MR; DeLucia, EH. (2008). Effects of elevated CO2 and O3 on leaf damage and insect abundance in a soybean agroecosystem. Arthropod

- Plant Inte 2: 125

- 135. DiBaccio, D; Castagna, A; Paoletti, E; Sebastiani, L; Ranieri, A. (2008). Could the differences in O3 sensitivity between two poplar clones be related to a difference in antioxidant defense and secondary metabolic response to O3 influx? Tree Physio l 28: 1761

- 1772. Dickson, RE; Lewin, KF; Isebrands, JG; Coleman, MD; Heilman, WE; Riemenschneider, DE; Sober, J; Host, GE; Zak, DR; Hendrey, GR; Pregitzer, KS; K arnosky, DF. (2000). Forest Atmosphere Carbon Transfer and Storage (FACTS

- II) the Aspen Free

- Air CO2 and O3 Enrichment (FACE) project: An overview. (General Technical Report NC

- 214). St. Paul, MN: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. http://nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/278 Ditchkoff, SS; Lewis, JS; Lin, JC; Muntifering, RB; Chappelka, AH. (2009). Nutritive quality of hi ghbush blackberry (Rubus argutus) exposed to tropospheric ozone. Rangeland Ecol Manag 62: 364

- 370. Dizengremel, P; Le Thiec, D; Bagard, M; Jolivet, Y. (2008). Ozone risk assessment for plants: Central role of metabolism

- dependent changes in reducing power. Environ Pollut 156: 11

- 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.12.024 Dizengremel, P; Le Thiec, D; Hasenfratz

- Sauder, MP; Vaultier, MN; Bagard, M; Jolivet, Y. (2009). Metabolic

- dependent changes in plant cell redox power after ozone exposure. Plant Bi ol (Stuttg) 11: 35

- 42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1438

- 8677.2009.00261.x Dizengremel, P; Sasek, T; Brown, K; Richardson, C. (1994). Ozone

- induced changes in primary carbon metabolism enzymes of loblolly pine needles. J Plant Physiol 144: 300

- 306. Dobson, HEM. (1994). Floral volatiles in insect biology. In EA Bernays (Ed.), Insect

- plant interactions: Vol 5 (pp. 47

- 82). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Dohm, MR; Maut z, WJ; Andrade, JA; Gellert, KS; Salas

- Ferguson, LJ; Nicolaisen, N; Fujie, N. (2005). Effects of ozone exposure on nonspecific phagocytic capacity of pulmonary macrophages from an amphibian, Bufo marinus. Environ Toxicol Chem 24: 205

- 210. Dohm, MR; Mautz, WJ; Doratt, RE; Stevens, JR. (2008). Ozone exposure affects feeding and locomotor behavior of adult Bufo marinus. Environ Toxicol Chem 27: 1209

- 1216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1897/07

- 388.1 Dohm, MR; Mautz, WJ; Looby, PG; Gellert, KS; Andrade, JA. (2001). Effects of ozone on evaporative water loss and thermoregulatory behavior of marine toads (Bufo marinus). Environ Res 86: 274

- 286. Dohrmann, AB; Tebbe, C C. (2005). Effect of elevated tropospheric ozone on the structure of bacterial communities inhabiting the rhizosphere of herbaceous plants native to Germany. Appl Environ Microbiol 71: 7750

- 7758. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.12.7750

- 7758.2005 Drogoudi, PD; Ashmore, M. (2001). 14C

- allocation of flowering and deblossomed strawberry in response to elevated ozone. New Phytol 152: 455

- 461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0028

- 646X.2001.00270.x Dro goudi, PD; Ashmore, MR. (2000). Does elevated ozone have differing effects in flowering and deblossomed strawberry? New Phytol 147: 561

- 569. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2000.0071 8.x Dudareva, N; Negre, F; Nagegowda, DA; Orlova, I. (2006). Plant volatiles: Recent advances and future perspectives [Review]. Crit Rev Plant Sci 25: 417

- 440. Ederli, L; Morettini, R; Borgogni, A; Wasternack, C; Miersch, O; Reale, L; Ferranti, F; Tosti, N; Pasqualini, S. (2006). Interaction between nitric oxide and ethylene in the induction of alternative oxidase in

ozone

- treated tobacco plants. Plant Physiol 142: 595

- 608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.085472 Edwards, IP; Zak, DR. (2011). Fungal community composition and function after long

- term exposure of northern forests to elevated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3. Glo bal Change Biol 17: 2184

- 2195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2010.02376.x Ellenson, JL; A mundson, RG. (1982). Delayed light imaging for the early detection of plant stress. Science 215: 1104

- 1106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.215.4536.1104 Ellsworth, DS; Reich, PB; Naumburg, ES; Koch, GW; Kubiske, ME; Smith, SD. (2004). Photosynthesis, carboxylation and leaf nitrogen responses of 16 species to elevated pCO2 across four free

- air CO2 enrichment experiments in forest, grassland and desert. Global Change Biol 10: 2121

- 2138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2004.00867.x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 164 June 2012 Eltayeb, AE; Kawano, N; Badawi, GH; Kaminaka, H; Sanekata, T; Morishima, I; Shibahara, T; Inanaga, S; Tanaka, K. (2006). Enhanced tolerance to ozone and drought stresses in transgenic tobacco overexpressing d ehydroascorbate reductase in cytosol. Physiol Plant 127: 57

- 65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2005.00624.x Eltayeb, AE; Kawano, N; Badawi, GH; Kaminaka, H; Sanekata, T; Shibahara, T; Inanaga, S; Tanaka, K. (2007). Overexpression of monodehydroascorbate reductase in transgenic tobacco confers enhanced tolerance to ozone, salt and polyethylen e glycol stresses. Planta 225: 1255

- 1264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425

- 006

- 0417

- 7 Emberson, L; Ashmor e, MR; Cambridge, HM; Simpson, D; Tuovinen, JP. (2000a). Modelling stomatal ozone flux across Europe. Environ Pollut 109: 403

- 413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(00)00043

- 9 Emberson, LD; Wieser, G; Ashmore, MR. (2000b). Modelling of stomatal conductance and ozone flux of Norway spruce: Comparison with field data. Environ Pollut 109: 393

- 402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(00)00042

- 7 Enders, G. (1992). Deposition of ozone to a mature spruce forest: Measurements and comparison to models. Environ Pollut 75: 61

- 67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(92)90057

- H Esperschutz, J; Pritsch, K; Gattinger, A; Welzl, G; Haesler, F; Buegger, F; Winkler, JB; Munch, JC; Schloter, M. (2009). Influence of chronic ozone stress on carbon translocation pattern into rhizosphere microbial communities of beech trees (Fagus sylvatica L.) during a growing season. Plant Soil 323: 85

- 95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 009

- 0090

- 2 Fares, S; Barta, C; Brilli, F; Centritto, M; Ederli, L; Ferranti, F; Pasqualini, S; Reale, L; Tricoli, D; Loreto, F. (2006). Impact of high ozone on isoprene emission, photosynthesis and hi stology of developing Populus alba leaves directly or indirectly exposed to the pollutant. Physiol Plant 128: 456

- 465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2006.00750.x Fares, S; Gentner, DR; Park, JH; Ormeno, E; Karlik, J; Goldstein, AH. (2011). Biogenic emissions from Citrus species in California. Atmos Environ 45: 4557

- 4568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.066 Fares, S; Loreto, F; Kleist, E; Wildt, J. (2008). Stomatal uptake and stomatal deposition of ozone in isoprene and monoterpene emitting plants. Plant Biol (Stuttg) 10: 44

- 54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2007

- 965257 Fares, S; McKay, M; Holzinger, R; Goldstein, AH. (2010a). Ozone fluxes in a Pinus ponderosa ecosystem are dominated by non

- stomatal processes: Evidence from long

- term continuous measurements. Agr Forest Meteorol 150: 420

- 431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.01.007 Fares, S; Oksanen, E; Lannenpaa, M ; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Loreto, F. (2010b). Volatile emissions and phenolic compound concentrations along a vertical profile of Populus nigra leaves exposed to realistic ozone concentrations. Photosynth Res 104: 61

- 74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11120

- 010

- 9549

- 5 Felzer, B; Kicklighter, D; Melillo, J; Wang, C; Xhuang, Q; Prinn, R. (2004). Effects of ozone on net primary production and carbon sequestration in the conterminous United States using a biogeochemistry model. Tellus B Chem Phys Meteorol 56: 230

- 248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600

- 0889.2004.00097.x Felzer, B; Reilly, J; Melillo, J; Kicklighter, D; Sarofim, M; Wang, C; Prinn, R; Zhuang, Q. (2005). Future

e ffects of ozone on carbon sequestration and climate change policy using a global biogeochemical model. Clim Change 73: 345

- 373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584

- 005

- 6776

- 4 Felzer, BS; Cronin, TW; Melillo, JM; Kicklighter, DW; Schlosser, CA. (2009). Importance of carbon

nitrogen interactions and ozone on ecosystem hydrology during the 21st century. J Geoph ys Res 114: G01020. Feng, YW; Komatsu, S; Furukawa, T; Koshiba, T; Kohno, Y. (2008a). Proteome analysis of proteins responsive to ambient and elevated ozone i n rice seedlings. Agric Ecosyst Environ 125: 255

- 265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.01.018 Feng , Z; Pang, J; Nouchi, I; Kobayashi, K; Yamakawa, T; Zhu, J. (2010). Apoplastic ascorbate contributes to the differential ozone sensitivity in two varieties of winter wheat under fully open

- air field conditions. Environ Pollut 158: 3539

- 3545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.08.019 Feng, ZZ; Kobayashi, K. (2009). Assessing the impacts of curre nt and future concentrations of surface ozone on crop yield with meta

- analysis. Atmos Environ 43: 1510

- 1519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.11.033

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 165 June 2012 Feng, ZZ; Kobayashi, K; Ainsworth, EA. (2008b). Impact of elevated ozone concentration on growth, physiology, and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): A meta

- analysis. Global Change Biol 14: 2 696

- 2708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2008.01673.x Fenn, ME; de Bauer, LI; Hernández

- Te jeda, T. (2002). Summary of air pollution impacts on forests in the Mexico City air basin. In Urban air pollution and forests. New York, NY: Springer

- Verlag. Fenn, ME; Poth, MA; Johnson, DW. (1996). Evidence for nitrogen saturation in the San Bernardino Mountains in southern California. For Ecol Manage 82: 211

- 230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378

- 1127(95)03668

- 7 Findley, DA; Keever, GJ; Chappelka, AH; Eakes, DJ; Gillian, DJ. (1997). Differential responses of buddleia (Buddl eia davidii Franch) to ozone. Environ Pollut 98: 105

- 111. Finkelstein, PL; Ellestad, TG; Clarke, JF; Meyers, TP; Schwede, DB; Hebert, EO; Neal, JA. (2000). Ozo ne and sulfur dioxide dry deposition to forests: Observations and model evaluation. J Geophys Res 105: 15365

- 15377. Finnan, JM; Burke, JL; Jones, MB. (1997). A n evaluation of indices that describe the impact of ozone on the yield of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Atmos Environ 31: 2685

- 2693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(97)00105

- 2 Finnan, JM; Jones, MB; Burke, JI. (1996). A time

- concentration study on the effects of ozone on spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L): 2. A comparison of indices. Agric E cosyst Environ 57: 169

- 177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167

- 8809(95)01004

- 1 Fiscus, EL; Booker, FL; Bur key, KO. (2005). Crop responses to ozone: Uptake, modes of action, carbon assimilation and partitioning. Plant Cell Environ 28: 997

- 1011. Fiscus, EL; Philbeck , R; Britt, AM; Booker, FL. (1999). Growth of Arabidopsis flavonoid mutants under solar radiation and UV filters. Environ Exp Bot 41: 231

- 245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0098

- 8472(99)00011

- 8 Fishman, J; Bowman, KW; Burrows, JP; Richter, A; Chance, KV; Edwards, DP; Martin, RV; Morris, GA; Pierce, RB; Ziemke, JR; Al

- Saadi, JA; Creilson, JK; Schaack, TK; Thompson, AM. (2008). Remote sensing of tropospheric pollution from space. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 89: 805

- 821. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2526.1 Fishman, J; Creilson, JK; Parker, PA; Ainsworth, EA; Vining, GG; Szarka, J; Booker, FL; Xu, XJ. (2010). An investigation of widespread ozone damage to the soybean crop in the upper Midwest determined from

g round

- based and satellite measurements. Atmos Environ 44: 2248

- 2256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.01.015 Flagler, RB. (1998). Recognition of air pollution injury to vegetation: A pictorial atlas (2nd ed.). Pittsburgh, PA: Air & Waste Management Association. Flowers, MD; Fiscus, EL; Burkey, KO; Booker, FL; Dubois, JJB. (2007). Photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence, and yield of snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes differing in sensitivity to ozone. Environ Exp Bot 61: 190

- 198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2007.05.009 Fontan, JA; Minga, A; Lopez, A; Druilhet, A. (1992). Vertical ozone profiles in a pine forest. Atmos Environ 26: 863

- 869. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0960

- 1686(92)90245

- G Foyer, CH; Noctor, G. (2005a). Oxidant and antioxidant signalling in plants: A re

- evaluation of the concept of oxidative stress in a physiological context. Plant Cell Environ 28: 1056

- 1071. Foyer, CH; Noctor, G. (2005b). Redox homeostasis and antioxidant signaling: A metabolic interface between stress perception and physiological responses. Plant Cell 17: 1866

- 1875. http://dx.doi.org/10.1105/tpc.105.033589 Fredericksen, TS; Joyce, BJ; Skelly, JM; Steiner, KC; Kolb, TE; Kouterick, KB; Savage, JE; Sny der, KR. (1995). Physiology, morphology, and ozone uptake of leaves of black cherry seedlings, saplings, and canopy trees. Environ Pollut 89: 273

- 283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(94)00 077

- Q Fredericksen, TS; Kolb, TE; Skelly, JM; Steiner, KC; Joyce, BJ; Savage, JE. (1996). Light environment alters ozone uptake per net photosynthetic rate in b lack cherry trees. Tree Physiol 16: 485

- 490. Freiwald, V; Haikio, E; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Holopainen, JK; Oksanen, E. (2008). Elevated ozone modifies the feedi ng behaviour of the common leaf weevil on hybrid aspen through shifts in developmental, chemical, and structural properties of leaves. Entomol Exp Appl 128: 66

- 72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j .1570

- 7458.2008.00677.x Fuentes, JD; Gillespie, TJ; den Hartog, G; Neumann, HH. (1992). Ozone deposition onto a deciduous forest during dry and wet conditions. Agr Forest Meteorol 62: 1

- 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168

- 1923(92)90002

- L

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 166 June 2012 Fuhrer, J. (1994). Effects of ozone on managed pasture: 1. Effects of open

- top chambers on microclimate, ozone flux, and plant growth. Environ Pollut 86: 297

- 305. Fuhrer, J ; Skarby, L; Ashmore, MR. (1997). Critical levels for ozone effects on vegetation in Europe. Environ Pollut 97: 91

- 106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(97)00067

- 5 Gate, IM; McNeill, S; Ashmore, MR. (1995). Effects of air pollution on the searching behaviour of an insect parasitoid. Water Air Soil Pollut 85: 1425

- 1430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00477181 Geiser, LH; Neitlich, PN. (2007). Pollution and climate gradients in western Oregon and Washingto n indicated by epiphytic macrolichens. Environ Pollut 145: 203

- 218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.03.024 Gerosa, G; Marzuoli, R; Rossini, M; Panigada, C; Meroni, M; Colombo, R; Faoro, F; Iriti, M. (2009). A flux

based assessment of the effects of ozone on foliar injury, photosynthesis, and yield of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L. cv. Borlotto Nan o Lingua di Fuoco) in open

- top chambers. Environ Pollut 157: 1727

- 1736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.06.028 Gielen, B; Vandermeiren, K; Horemans, N; D'Haese, D; Serneels, R; Valcke, R. (2006). Chlorophyll a fluorescence imaging of ozone

- stressed Brassica napus L. plants differing in glucosinolate concentrations. Plant Biol (Stuttg) 8: 698

- 70 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2006

- 924150 Gitay, H; Brown, S; Easterling, W; Jallow, B. (2001). Ecosystem s and their goods and services. In Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability: Contribution of Working Group II to the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Gombert, S; Asta, J; Seaward, MRD. (2006). Lichens and tobacco plants as complementary biomonitors of air pollution in the Grenoble area (Isere, southe ast France). Ecol Indicat 6: 429

- 443. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.06.001 Gonzalez

- Ferna ndez, I; Kaminska, A; Dodmani, M; Goumenaki, E; Quarrie, S; Barnes, JD. (2010). Establishing ozone flux

- response relationships for winter wheat: Analysis of uncertainties based on data for UK and Polish genotypes. Atmos Environ 44: 621

- 630. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.11.021 Goumenaki, E; Taybi, T; Borland, A; Barnes, J. (2 010). Mechanisms underlying the impacts of ozone on photosynthetic performance. Environ Exp Bot 69: 259

- 266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.04.011 Grantz, DA; Gunn, S; Vu, HB. (2006). O3 impacts on plant development: A meta

- analysis of root/shoot allocation and growth. Plant Cell Environ 29: 1193

- 1209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2006.01521.x Grantz, DA; Shrestha, A. (2006). Tropospheric ozone and interspecific competition between yellow nutsedge and pima cotton. Crop Sci 46: 1879

- 1889. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.06.0167 Grantz, DA; Shrestha, A; Vu, HB. (2008). Early vigor and ozone response in horseweed (Conyza canadensis) biotypes differing in glyphosate resistance. Weed Sci 56: 224

- 230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/ws

- 07

- 130.1 Grantz, DA; Shrestha, A; Vu, HB. (2010a). Ozone impacts on assimilation and allocation to reproductive sinks in th e vegetatively propagated C

- 4 weed, yellow nutsedge. Crop Sci 50: 246

- 252. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2009.03.0127 Grantz, DA; Vu, HB. (2009). O3 sensitivity in a potential C4 bioenergy crop: Sugarcane in California. Crop Sci 49: 643

- 650. Grantz, DA; Vu, HB; Aguilar, C; Rea, MA. (2010b). No interaction between methyl jasmonate and ozone in Pima cotton: Growth and allocation respond independently to both. Plant Cell Environ 33: 717

- 728. ht tp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2009.02096.x Grantz, DA; Zhang, XJ; Massman, W; Delany, A; Pederson, R. (1997). Ozone deposition to a cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L) field: Stomatal and surface wetness effects during the California Ozone Deposition experiment. Agr Forest Meteorol 85: 19

- 31. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168

- 1923(96)02396

- 9 Grantz, DA; Zhang, XJ; Massman, WJ; Den Hartog, G; Neumann, HH; Pederson, JR. (1995). Effects of stomatal conductance a nd surface wetness on ozone deposition in field

- grown grape. Atmos Environ 29: 3189

- 3198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1352

- 2310(95)00129

- M Grebenc, T; Kraigher, H. (2007). Changes in the community of ectomycorrhizal fungi and increased fine root number under adult beech trees chronically fumigated with double ambient ozone concentration. Plant Biol (Stut tg) 9: 279

- 287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2006

- 924489

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 167 June 2012 Gregg, JW; Jones, CG; Dawson, TE. (2003). Urbaniza tion effects on tree growth in the vicinity of New York City [Letter]. Nature 424: 183

- 187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature01728 Gregg, JW; Jones, CG; Dawson, TE. (2006). Physiological and developmental effects of O3 on cottonwood growth in urban and rural sites. Ecol Appl 16: 2368

- 2381. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/1051

- 0761(2006)016[2368:PADEOO]2.0.CO;2 Grennfelt, P. (2004). New directions: Recent research findings may change ozone con trol policies. Atmos Environ 38: 2215

- 2216. Groppa, MD; Benavides, MP. (2008). Polyamines and abiotic stress: Recent advances. Amino Acids 34: 35

- 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00726

- 007

- 0501

- 8 Grulke, N; Neufeld, H; Davison, A; Roberts, M; Chappelka, A. (200 7a). Stomatal behavior of ozone

sensitive and

- insensitive coneflowers (Rudbeckia laciniata var. digitata) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. New Phytol 173: 100

- 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2006.01872.x Grulke, NE. (1999). Physiological responses of ponderosa pine to gradients of environmental stressors. In PR Miller; JR McBride (Eds.), Oxidant air pollution impacts in the montane forests of Southern California (pp. 126

- 163). New York, NY: Springer

- Verlag. Grulke, NE; A lonso, R; Nguyen, T; Cascio, C; Dobrowolski, W. (2004). Stomata open at night in pole

- sized and mature ponderosa pine: Implications for O3 exposure metrics. Tree Physiol 24: 1001

- 1010. Grulke, NE; Dobrowolski, W; Mingus, P; Fenn, ME. (2005). California black oak response to nitrogen amendment at a high O3, nitrogen

- saturated site. Environ Pollut 137: 536

- 545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.01.039 Grulke, NE; Johnson, R; Esperanza, A; Jones, D; Nguyen, T; Posch, S; Tausz, M. (2003a). Canopy transp iration of Jeffrey pine in mesic and xeric microsites: O3 uptake and injury response. Trees Struct Funct 17: 292

- 298. Grulke, NE; Johnson, R; Monschein, S; Nikolo va, P; Tausz, M. (2003b). Variation in morphological and biochemical O3 injury attributes of mature Jeffrey pine within canopies and between microsites. Tree Physiol 23: 923

- 929. Grulke, NE; Lee, EH. (1997). Assessing visible ozone

- induced injury in ponderosa pine. Can J For Res 27: 1658

- 1668. Grulke, NE; Paoletti, E; Heath, RL. (2007b). Chronic vs. short

- term acute O3 exposure effects on nocturnal transpiration in two Californian oaks. ScientificWorldJournal 7: 134

- 140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2007.33 Grulke, NE; Paoletti, E; Heath, RL. (2007c). Comparison of calculated and measured foliar O3 flux in crop and forest species. Environ Pollut 146: 640

- 647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.04.014 Grulke, NE; Preisler, HK; Rose, C; Kirsch, J; Balduman, L. ( 2002). O3 uptake and drought stress effects on carbon acquisition of ponderosa pine in natural stands. New Phytol 154: 621

- 631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2002.00403.x Grunhage, L; Haenel, HD. (1997). PLATIN (PLant

- ATmosphere

- INteraction) I: A model of plant

- atmosphere interaction for estimating absorbed doses of gaseous air pollutants. Environ Pollut 98: 37

- 50. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/S0269

- 7491(97)00114

- 0 Grunhage, L; Jager, HJ. (2003). From critical levels to critical loads for ozone: a discussion of a new experimental and modelling ap proach for establishing flux

- response relationships for agricultural crops and native plant species. Environ Pollut 125: 99

- 110. Grunhage, L; Krupa, SV; Legge, AH ; Jager, HJ. (2004). Ambient flux

- based critical values of ozone for protecting vegetation: Differing spatial scales and uncertainties in risk assessment. Atmos Environ 38: 2433

- 2437. http:/ /dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.12.039 Guenther, A; Karl, T; Harley, P; Wiedinmyer, C; Palmer, PI; Geron, C. (2006). Estimates of global terrestrial isopre ne emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature). Atmos Chem Phys 6: 3181

- 3210. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp

- 6

- 3181

- 2006 Guidi, L; Degl'Innocenti, E; Martinelli, F; Piras, M. (2009). Ozone effects on carbon metabolism in sensitive and insensitive Phaseolus cultivars. Environ Exp Bot 66: 117

- 125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2008.12.005 Guidi, L; Degl'lnnocenti, E. (2008). Ozone effects on high light

- induced photoinhibition in Phaseolus vulgaris. Plant Sci 174: 590

- 596. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2008.03.003 Gül, H; Gaga, EO; Döğeroğlu, T; Ozden, O; Ayvaz, O; Ozel, S; Güngör, G. (2011). Respiratory health symptoms among students exposed to different levels of air pollution in a Turkish city. Int J En viron Res Public Health 8: 1110

- 1125. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph8041110

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 168 June 2012 Gumpertz, ML; Rawlings, JO. (1992). Nonlinear regression with variance components: Modeling effects of ozone on crop yield. Crop Sci 32: 219

- 224. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1992.0011183X003200010045x Gunderson, CA; Sholtis, JD; Wullschleger, SD; Tissue, DT; Hanson, PJ; Norby, RJ. (2002). Environmental and stomatal control of photosynthetic enhancement in the canopy of a sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua L) plantation during 3 years of CO2 enrichment. Plant Cell Environ 25: 379

- 393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0016

- 8025.2001.00816.x Haberer, K; Herbinger, K; Alexou, M; Rennenberg, H; Tausz, M. (2008). Effects of drought and canopy ozone exposure on antioxidants in fine roots of mature European beech (Fagus sylvatica). Tree Physiol 28: 713

- 719. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/28.5.713 Hamel, LP; Miles, GP; Samuel, MA; Ellis, BE; Seguin, A; Beaudoin, N. (2005). Activation of stress

responsive mitogen

- activated protein kinase pathways in hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa x Populus deltoides). Tree Physiol 25: 277

- 288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/25.3.277 Hamilton, JG; Dermody, O; Aldea, M; Zangerl, AR; Rogers, A; Berenbaum, MR; DeLucia, EH. (2005). Anthropogenic changes in tropospheric composition increase susceptibility of soybean to insect herbivory. Environ Entomol 34: 479

- 485. Handley, T; Grulke, NE. (2008). Interactive effects of O3 exposure on California black oak (Quercus kelloggii Newb.) seedlings with and without N amendment. Environ Pollut 156: 53

- 60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.01.002 Hanson, PJ; Wullschleger, SD; Norby, RJ; Tschaplinski, TJ; Gund erson, CA. (2005). Importance of changing CO2, temperature, precipitation, and ozone on carbon and water cycles of an upland

- oak forest: incorporating experimental results into model simulations. Global Change Biol 11: 1402

- 1423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.00991.x Harward, M; Treshow, M. (1975). Impact of ozone on the growth and r eproduction of understorey plants in the Aspen zone of western USA. Environ Conserv 2: 17

- 23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900000564 Hassan, R; Scholes, R; Ash, N. (2005). Ecosystems and human well

- being: Current state and trends. Washington, DC: Island Press. Hayes, F; Jones, MLM; Mills, G; Ashmore, M. (2007). Meta

- analysis of the relative sensitivity of semi

natural vegetation species to ozone. Environ Pollut 146: 754

- 762. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.06.011 Hayes, F; Mills, G; Ashmore, M. (2009). Effects of ozone on inter

- and intra

- species competition and photosynthe sis in mesocosms of Lolium perenne and Trifolium repens. Environ Pollut 157: 208

- 214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.07.002 Hayes, F; Mills, G; Ashmore, M. (2010). How Much Does the Presence of a Competitor Modify the Within

Canopy Distribution of Ozone

- Induced Senescence and Visible Injury? Water Air Soil Pollut 210: 265

- 276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 009

- 0248

- 9 He, XY; Fu, SL; Chen, W; Zhao, TH; Xu, S; Tuba, Z. (2007). Changes in eff ects of ozone exposure on growth, photosynthesis, and respiration of Ginkgo biloba in Shenyang urban area. Photosynthetica 45: 555

- 561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11099

- 007

- 0095

- 0 He, XY; Ruan, YN; Chen, W; Lu, T. (2006). Responses of anti

- oxidative system in leaves of Ginkgo biloba to elevated ozone concentration in urban area. Botanical Studies 47: 409

- 416. Heagle, AS. (1979). Effects of growth media, fertiliser rate and hour and season of exposure on sensitivity of four soybean cultivars to ozone. Environ Po llut 18: 313

- 322. Heagle, AS. (1989). Ozone and crop yield*. Annu Rev Phytopathol 27: 397

- 423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.py.27.090189.002145 Heagle, AS; Body, DE; Heck, WW. (1973). An open

- top field chamber to assess the impact of air polluti on on plants. J Environ Qual 2: 365

- 368. Heagle, AS; Brandenburg, RL; Burns, JC; Miller, JE. (1994a). Ozone and carbon dioxide effects on spider mites in white clover and peanut. J Environ Qual 23: 1168

- 1176. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1994.00472425002300060006x Heagle, AS; Heck, WW; Lesser, VM; Rawlings, JO. (1987). Effects of daily ozone exposure duration and concentration fluctuation on yield of tobacco. Phytopathology 77: 856

- 862. http://dx.d oi.org/10.1094/Phyto

- 77

- 856

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 169 June 2012 Heagle, AS; Kress, LW; Temple, PJ; Kohut, RJ; Miller, JE; Heggestad, HE. (1988). Factors influencing ozone dose

- yield response relat ionships in open

- top field chamber studies. In WW Heck; OC Taylor; DT Tingey (Eds.), Assessment of crop loss from air pollutants: Proceedings of an international conference (pp. 141

- 179). New York, NY: Elsevier Applied Science. Heagle, AS; Letchworth, MB; Mitchell, CA. (1983). Effects of growth medium and fertilizer rate on the yield response of soybeans exposed to chronic doses of ozone. Phytopathology 73: 134

- 139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/Phyto

- 73

- 134 Heagle, AS; Miller, JE; Rawlings, JO; Vozzo, SF. (1991). Effect of growth stage on soybean response to chronic ozone exposure. J Environ Qual 20: 562

- 570. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1991.00472425002000030010x Heagle, AS; Miller, JE; Sherrill, DE. (1994b). A white clover system to estimate effects of tropospheric ozone on plants. J Environ Qual 23: 613

- 621. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1994.00472425002300030030x Heagle, AS; Reinert, RA; Miller, JE. (1996). Response of white clover to ozone in different environments. J Environ Qual 25: 273

- 278. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1996.00472425002500020010x Heath, RL. (2008). Modification of the biochemical pathways of plants induced by ozone: What are the varied routes to change? Environ Pollut 155: 453

- 463. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.envpol.2008.03.010 Heath, RL; Lefohn, AS; Musselman, RC. (2009). Temporal processes that contribute to nonlinearity in vegetation responses to ozone exp osure and dose. Atmos Environ 43: 2919

- 2928. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.03.011 Heck, WW; Cowling, EB. (1997). The need for a long term cumulative secondary ozone standard

- An ecological perspective. EM January: 23

- 33. Heck, WW; Cure, WW; Rawli ngs, JO; Zaragoza, LJ; Heagle, AS; Heggestad, HE; Kohut, RJ; Kress, LW; Temple, PJ. (1984). Assessing impacts of ozone on agricultural crops: II. Crop yield functions and alternative exposure statistics. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 34: 810

- 817. Heck, WW; Heagle, AS; Miller, JE; Rawlings, JO. (1991). A national program (NCLAN) to assess the impact of ozone on agricultural resources. In RL Berglund; DR Lawson; D J McKee (Eds.), Tropospheric ozone and the environment: papers from an international conference; March 1990; Los Angeles, CA (pp. 225

- 254). Pittsburgh, PA: Air & Waste Management Association. Heck, WW; Philbeck, RB; Dunning, JA. (1978). A continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) system for exposing plants to gaseous air contaminants: Principles, specifications, construction, and operation. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov ernment Printing Office. Heck, WW; Taylor, OC; Adams, R; Bingham, G; Miller, J; Preston, E; Weinstein, L. (1982). Assessment of crop loss from ozone. J Air Pol lut Control Assoc 32: 353

- 361. Heggestad, HE. (1991). Origin of Bel

- W3, Bel

- C and Bel

- B tobacco varieties and their use as indicators of ozone. Environ Pollut 74: 263

- 291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(91)90076

- 9 Heidenreich, B; Haberer, G; Mayer, K; San dermann, H; Ernst, D. (2005). CDNA array

- analysis of mercury

and ozone

- induced genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 27: 45

- 51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11738

- 005

- 0035

- 1 Hendrey, GR; Ellsworth, DS; Lewin, KF; Nagy, J. (1999). A free

- air enrichment system for exposing tall forest vegetation to elevated atmospheric CO2. Global Chan ge Biol 5: 293

- 309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 2486.1999.00228.x Hendrey, GR; Kimball, BA. (1994). The FACE program. Agr Forest Meteorol 70: 3

- 14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168

- 1923(94)90044

- 2 Hildebrand, E; Skelly, JM; Fredericksen, TS. (1996). Foliar response of ozone

- sensitive hardwood tree species from 1991 to 1993 in the Shenandoah National Park, Virginia. Can J For Res 26: 658

- 669. Hillstrom, M; Meehan, TD; Kelly, K; Lindroth, RL. (2010a). Soil carbon and nitrogen mineralization following deposition of insect frass and greenfall from forests under elevated CO2 and O3. Plant Soil 336: 75

- 85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 010

- 0449

- 4 Hillstrom, ML; L indroth, RL. (2008). Elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and ozone alter forest insect abundance and community composition. Insect Conservation and Diversity 1: 233

- 241. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1752

- 4598.2008.00031.x Hillstrom, ML; Vigue, LM; Coyle, DR; Raffa, KF; Lindroth, RL. (2010b). Performance of the invasive weevil Polydrusus sericeus is influenced by atmospheric CO2 and host species. Agr Forest Entomol 12: 285

- 292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461

- 9563.2010.00474.x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 170 June 2012 Himanen, SJ; Nerg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2009a). Degree of herbivore feeding damage as an important contributor to multitrophic plant

- parasitoid signaling under climate change. Plant Signalling & Behavior 4: 249

- 251. Himanen, SJ; Nerg, AM; Nissinen, A; Pinto, DM; Stewart, CN; Poppy, GM; Holopainen, JK. (2009b). Effects of elevated carbon dioxide and ozone on volatile terpe noid emissions and multitrophic communication of transgenic insecticidal oilseed rape (Brassica napus). New Phytol 181: 174

- 186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2008.02646.x Himanen, SJ; Nerg, AM; Nissinen, A; Stewart, CN; Poppy, GM; Holopainen, JK. (2009c). Elevated atmospheric ozone increases concentration of insecticidal Bacillus thuringie nsis (Bt) Cry1Ac protein in Bt Brassica napus and reduces feeding of a Bt target herbivore on the non

- transgenic parent. Environ Pollut 157: 181

- 185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.07.00 6 Hogg, A; Uddling, J; Ellsworth, D; Carroll, MA; Pressley, S; Lamb, B; Vogel, C. (2007). Stomatal and non

stomatal fluxes of ozone to a northern mixed hardwoo d forest. Tellus B Chem Phys Meteorol 59: 514

- 525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600

- 0889.2007.00269.x Hogsett, WE; Olszyk, D; Ormrod, DP; Taylor, GE, Jr; Tingey, DT. (1987a). Air pollution exposure systems and experimental protocols: Volume 2: Description of facilities. (EPA/600/3

- 87/037b). Corvallis, OR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enviro nmental Research Laboratory. http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=30000KQH.txt Hogsett, WE; Olszyk, D; Ormrod, DP; Taylor, GE, Jr; Tingey, DT. (1987b). Air pollution exposure systems and experimental protocols: Volume I: A review and evaluation of performance. (EPA/600/3

- 87/037a). Corvallis, OR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Hogsett, WE; Tingey, DT; Holman, SR. (1985). A programmable exposure control system for determination of the effects of pollutant exposure regimes on plant growth. Atmos Environ 19: 1135

- 1145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(85)90198

- 2 Hogsett, WE; Tingey, DT; L ee, EH. (1988). Ozone exposure indices: Concepts for development and evaluation of their use. In Assessment of crop loss from air pollutants: Proceedings of an international conference. New York: Elsevier Applied Science. Hogsett, WE; Tingey, DT; Lee, EH; Beedlow, PA; Andersen, CP. (2008). An approach for evaluating the effectiveness of various ozone Air Quality Standards for protecting trees. Environ Manage 41: 937

- 948. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267

- 007

- 9057

- 3 Hogsett, WE; Weber, JE; Tingey, D; Herstrom, A; Lee, EH; Laurence, JA. (1997). Environmental auditing: An approach for characterizing tropospheric ozone risk to forests. J Environ Manage 21: 105

- 120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s002679900010 Holmes, WE; Zak, DR; Pregitzer, KS; King, JS. (2006). Elevated CO2 and O3 alter soil nitrogen transformations beneath trembling aspen, paper birch, and sugar maple. Ecosystems 9: 1354

- 1363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10021

- 006

- 0163

- 5 Hong, B; Weinstein, D; Swaney, D. (2006). Assessment of ozone effects on nitrate export from Hubbard Brook Watershed 6. Environ Pollut 141: 8

- 21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.08.030 Horvath, L; Nagy, Z; Weidinger, T; Artz, R; Luke, WT; Valigura, R; Pinto, JP; Womack, J. (1995). Measurement of fluxes of trace gases (O3, NOX, SO2, CO2, HNO3), particulate sulfate and nitrate, water vapour over short vegetation by gradient and eddy correlation techniques in Hungary. Ann Geophys 13: C490. Howard, AR; van Iersel, MW; Richards, JH; Donova n, LA. (2009). Night

- time transpiration can decrease hydraulic redistribution. Plant Cell Environ 32: 1060

- 1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2009.01988.x Hui, D; Sims, DA; Johnson, DW; Chang, W; Luo, Y. (2002). Effects of gradual versus step increases in carbon dioxide on Plantago photosynthesis and growth in a microcosm s tudy. Environ Exp Bot 47: 51

- 66. ICP M&M (International Cooperative Programme on Modelling and Mapping). (2004). Mapping critical levels for vegetation. In Manual on methodologies and criteria for modelling and mapping critical loads and levels, and air pollution effects, risks and trends. http://www.rivm.nl/en/themasites/icpmm/manual

- and

- downloads/manual

- english/index.html Innes, JL; Skelly, JM; Schaub, M. (2001). Ozon, Laubholz

- und Krautpflanzen: Ein Fuhrer zum Bestimmen von Ozonsymptomen. Bern, Switzerland: Paul Haupt Publishers. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). (2007a). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 171 June 2012 Iriti, M; Di Maro, A; Bernasconi, S; Burlini, N; Simonetti, P; Picchi, V; Panigada, C; Gerosa, G; Parente, A; Faoro, F. (2009). Nutritional traits of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) seeds from plants chronically exposed to ozone poll ution. J Agric Food Chem 57: 201

- 208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf802819m Iriti, M; Faoro, F. (2009). Chemica l diversity and defence metabolism: How plants cope with pathogens and ozone pollution. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 10: 3371

- 3399. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms10083371
IRRI (International Rice Research Institute). (2002). IRRI annual report 2001

- 2002. Los Baños, Laguna in the Philippines. http://www.scribd.com/collections/2641758/Annual

- Reports Isebrands, JG; Dickson, RE; Rebbeck, J; Karnosky, DF. (2000). Interacting effects of m ultiple stresses on growth and physiological processes in northern forest trees. In RA Mickler; RA Birsdey; J Hom (Eds.), Responses of northern US forests to environmental change (pp. 149

- 180). New York, NY: Springer

- Verlag. Isebrands, JG; McDonald, EP; Kruger, E; Hendrey, G; Percy, K; Pregitzer, K; Sober, J; Karnosky, DF. (2001). Growth responses of Populus tremuloides clones to interacting carbon dioxide and tropospheric ozone. Environ Pollut 115: 359

- 371. Jackson, DM; Heagle, AS ; Eckel, RVW. (1999). Ovipositional response of tobacco hornworm moths (Lepidoptera: Sphyngidae) to tobacco plants grown under elevated levels of ozone. Environ Entomol 28: 566

- 571. Janzik, I; Preiskowski, S; Kneifel, H. (2005). Ozone has dramatic effects on the regulation of the prechorismate pathway in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L. cv. Bel W3). Planta 223: 20

- 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425

- 005

- 0060

- 8 Johnson, RM; Pregitzer, KS. (2007). Concentration of sugars, phenolic acids, and amino acids in fore st soils exposed to elevated atmospheric CO2 and O3. Soil Biol Biochem 39: 3159

- 3166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.07.010 Jones, ME; Paine, TD. (2006). Detecting changes in insect herbivore communities along a pollution gradient. Environ Pollut 143: 377

- 387. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.envpol.2005.12.013 Jones, MLM; Hodges, G; Mills, G. (2010). Nitrogen mediates above

- ground effects of ozone but not below

ground effects in a rhizomatou s sedge. Environ Pollut 158: 559

- 565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.08.002 Jones, TG; Freem an, C; Lloyd, A; Mills, G. (2009). Impacts of elevated atmospheric ozone on peatland below

- ground doc characteristics. Ecol Eng 35: 971

- 977. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.08.009 Joo, JH; Wang, SY; Chen, JG; Jones, AM; Fedoroff, NV. (2005). Different signaling and cell death roles of heterotrimeric G protein alpha and beta subunits in the arabidopsis oxidative stress response to ozone. Plant Cell 17: 957

- 970. http://dx.doi.org/10.1105/tpc.104.029603 Joss, U; Graber, WK. (1996). Profiles and simulated exchange of H2O, O3, NO2 between the atmosphere and the HartX Scots pine plantation. Theor Appl Climatol 53: 157

- 172. Jovan, S; McCune, B. (2006). Using epiphytic macrolichen communities for biomonitoring ammonia in forests of the greater Sierra Nevada, California. Water Air Soil Pollut 170: 69

- 93. Kanerva, T; Palojarvi, A; Ramo, K; Manninen, S. (2008). Changes in soil microbial community structure under elevated tropospheric O3 and CO2. Soil Biol Biochem 40: 2502

- 2510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.06.007 Kanerva, T; Palojarvi, A; Ramo, K; Ojanpera, K; Esala, M; Manninen, S. (2006). A 3

- year exposure to CO2 and O3 induced minor changes in soil N cycling in a meadow ecosystem. Plant Soil 286: 61

- 73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 006

- 9026

- 2 Kanerva, T; Regina, K; Ramo, K; Ojanpera, K; Manninen, S. (2007). Fluxes of N2O, CH4 and CO2 in a meadow ecosystem exposed to elevated ozone and carbon dioxide for three years. Environ P ollut 145: 818

- 828. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.03.055 Kangasjarvi, J; Jaspers, P; Kollis t, H. (2005). Signalling and cell death in ozone

- exposed plants. Plant Cell Environ 28: 1021

- 1036. Karlsson, PE; Sellden, G; Plaijel, H. (2003). Establishin g ozone critical levels II: UNECE workshop report. Gothenburg, Sweden: IVL Swedish Environmental Institute. Karlsson, PE; Uddling, J; Braun, S; Broadmeadow, M; El vira, S; Gimeno, BS; Le Thiec, D; Okansen, E; Vandermeiren, K; Wilkinson, M; Emberson, L. (2004). New critical levels for ozone effects on young trees based on AOT40 and simulated cumulative leaf uptake of ozone. Atmos Environ 38: 2283

- 2294.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 172 June 2012 Karnosky, DF; Gagnon, ZE; Dickson, RE; Coleman, MD; Lee, EH; Isebrands, JG. (1996). Changes in growth, leaf abscission, biomass associated with seasonal tropospheric ozon e exposures of Populus tremuloides clones and seedlings. Can J For Res 26: 23

- 37. Karnosky, DF; Mankovska, B; Percy, K; Dickson, RE; Podila, GK; Sober, J; Noormet s, A; Hendrey, G; Coleman, MD; Kubiske, M; Pregitzer, KS; Isebrands, JG. (1999). Effects of tropospheric ozone on trembling aspen and interaction with CO2: Results from an O3

- gradient and a FACE experiment. Water Air Soil Pollut 116: 311

- 322. Karnosky, DF; Pregitzer, KS; Zak, DR; Kubiske, ME; Hendrey, GR; Weinstein, D; Nosal, M; Percy, KE. (2005). Scaling ozone responses of forest trees to the ecosystem level in a changing climate. Plant Cell Environ 28: 965

- 981. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2005.01362.x Karnosky, DF; Zak, DR; Pregitzer, KS; Awmack, CS; Bockheim, JG; Dickson, RE; Hendrey, GR; Host, GE; King, JS; Kopper, BJ; Kruger, EL; Kubiske, ME; Lindroth, RL; Mattson, WJ; McDonald, EP; Noormets, A; Oksanen, E; Parsons, WFJ; Percy, KE; Podila, GK; Riemenschneider, DE; Sharma, P; Thakur, R; Sober, A; Sober, J; Jones, WS; Anttonen, S; Vapaavuori, E; Mankovska, B; Heilman, W; Isebrands, JG. (2003). Tropospheric O3 moderates responses of temperate hardwood forests to elevated CO2: A synthesis of molecular to ecosystem results from the Aspen FACE project. Funct Ecol 17: 289

- 304. Kasurinen, A; Keinanen, MM; Kaipainen, S; Nilsson, LO; Vapaavuori, E; Kontro, MH; Holopainen, T. (2005). Below

- ground responses of silver birch trees exposed to elevated CO2 and O3 levels during three growing seasons. Global Change Biol 11: 1167

- 1179. http://dx.doi .org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.00970.x Kasurinen, A; Peltonen, PA; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Vapaavuori, E; Nuutinen, V; Holopainen, T; Holopainen, JK. (2007). Effects of elevated CO2 and O3 on leaf litter phenolics and subsequent performance of litter

feeding soil macrofauna. Plant Soil 292: 25

- 43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 007

- 9199

- 3 Kasurinen, A; Riikonen, J; Oksanen, E; Vapaavuori, E; Holopainen, T. (2006). Chemical composition and decomposition of silver birch leaf litter produced under elev ated CO2 and O3. Plant Soil 282: 261

- 280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 005

- 6026

- 6 Kats, G; Olszyk, DM ; Thompson, CR. (1985). Open top experimental chambers for trees. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 35: 1298

- 1301. Kats, G; Thompson, CR; Kuby, WC. (1976). Improved v entilation of open top greenhouses. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 26: 1089

- 1090. Keller, T; Häsler, R. (1984). The influence of a fall fumigation with ozone on t he stomatal behavior of spruce and fir. Oecologia 64: 284

- 286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00376884 Kellomaki, S ; Wang, KY. (1997). Effects of elevated O3 and CO2 concentrations on photosynthesis and stomatal conductance in Scots pine. Plant Cell Environ 20: 995

- 1006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1 365

- 3040.1997.tb00676.x Kerner, R; Winkler, J; Dupuy, J; Jürgensen, M; Lindermayr, C; Ernst, D; Müller

- starck, G. (2011). Changes in the proteome of juvenile E uropean beech following three years exposure to free

- air elevated ozone. iForest 4: 69

- 76. http://dx.doi.org/10.3832/ifor0570

- 004 Keutgen, AJ; Noga, G; Pawelzik, E. (2005). Cultivar

- specific impairment of strawberry growth, photosynthesis, carbohydrate and nitrogen accumulation by ozone. Environ Exp Bot 53: 271

- 280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2004.04.003 Keutgen, N; Keutgen, AJ; Janssens, MJJ. (2008). Sweet potato [Ipomoea batata s (L.) Lam.] cultivated as tuber or leafy vegetable supplier as affected by elevated tropospheric ozone. J Agric Food Chem 56: 6686

- 6690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf8006272 King, JS; Kubiske, ME; Pregitzer, KS; Hendrey, GR; McDonald, EP; Giardina, CP; Quinn, VS; Karnosky,
DF. (2005). Tropospheric O3 compromises net primary production in young stands of trembling aspen, paper birch and sugar maple in response to elevated atmospheric CO2. New Phytol 168: 623

- 635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2005.01557.x King, JS; Pregitzer, KS; Zak, DR; Sober, J; Isebrands, JG; Dickson, RE; Hendrey, GR; Karnosky, DF. (2001). Fine

- root biomass and fluxes of soil carbon in young stands of paper birch and trembling as pen as affected by elevated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3. Oecologia 128: 237

- 250. Kitao, M; Low, M; Heerdt, C; Grams, TEE; Haberle, KH; Matyssek, R. (2 009). Effects of chronic elevated ozone exposure on gas exchange responses of adult beech trees (Fagus sylvatica) as related to the within

- canopy light gradient. Environ Pollut 157: 537

- 544. http ://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.09.016

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 173 June 2012 Kline, LJ; Davis, DD; Skelly, JM; Decoteau, DR. (2009). Variation in ozone sensitivity within Indian hemp and common milkweed selections from the Midwest. Northeast Nat 16: 307

- 313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1656/045.016.0210 Klin e, LJ; Davis, DD; Skelly, JM; Savage, JE; Ferdinand, J. (2008). Ozone sensitivity of 28 plant selections exposed to ozone under controlled conditions. Northeast Nat 15: 57

- 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1656/1092

- 6194(2008)15[57:OSOPSE]2.0.CO;2 Kohut, R. (2007). Assessing the risk of foliar injury from ozone on vegetation in parks in th e US National Park Service's Vital Signs Network. Environ Pollut 149: 348

- 357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.04.022 Kolb, TE; Fredericksen, TS; Steiner, KC; Skelly, JM. (1997). Issues in scaling tree size and age responses to ozone: A review [Review]. Environ Pollut 98: 195

- 208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(97)00132

- 2 Kollist, T; Moldau, H; Rasulov, B; Oja, V; Ramma, H; Huve, K; Jaspers, P; Kangasjarvi, J; Kollist, H. (20 07). A novel device detects a rapid ozone

- induced transient stomatal closure in intact Arabidopsis and its absence in abi2 mutant. Physiol Plant 129: 796

- 803. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2006.00851.x Kostka

- Rick, R; Hahn, HU. (2005). Biomonitoring using tobacco Bel W3 provides supplemental information for risk assessment of vegetation inj ury due to ozone. Gefahrstoffe Reinhaltung Der Luft 65: 485

- 491. Kozovits, AR; Matyssek, R; Blaschke, H; Gottlein, A; Grams, TEE. (2005). Competition increasi ngly dominates the responsiveness of juvenile beech and spruce to elevated CO2 and/or O3 concentrations throughout two subsequent growing seasons. Global Change Biol 11: 1387

- 1401. http://dx. doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.00993.x Krupa, SV; Grunhage, L; Jager, HJ; Nosal, M; Manning, WJ; Legge, AH; Hanewald, K. (1995). Ambient ozone (O3) and advers e crop response: A unified view of cause and effect. Environ Pollut 87: 119

- 126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(99)80014

- 1 Krupa, SV; Nosal, M; Peterson, DL. (2001). Use of passive ozone O3 samplers in vegetation effects assessment. Environ Pollut 112: 303

- 309. Kubiske, ME; Quinn, VS; Heilman, WE; McDonald, EP; Marquardt, PE; Teclaw, RM; Friend, AL; Karnoskey, DF. (2006). Interannual climatic variation mediates elevated CO2 and O3 effects on forest growth. Global Change Biol 12: 1054

- 1068. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2006.01152.x Kubiske, ME; Quinn, VS; Marquardt, PE; Karnosky, DF. (2 007). Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 and/or O3 on intra

- and interspecific competitive ability of aspen. Plant Biol (Stuttg) 9: 342

- 355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2006

- 924760 Laffray, X; Rose, C; Garrec, JP. (2007). Estimation of ozone concentration in a valley of the alps mountains based on bel

- w3 tobacco leaf injury. Water Air Soil Pollut 1 86: 29

- 42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11270

- 007

- 9460

- 7 Lambers, H; Chapin, FS, III; Pons, TL. (1998). Plant physiological ecology. In H Lambers; FS Chapin, III; TL Pons (Eds.). New York: Springer. Langebartels, C; Kerner, K; Leonardi, S; Schraudner, M; Trost, M; Heller, W; Sandermann, H, Jr. (1991). Biochemical plant responses to ozone: I. Differential induction of polyamine and ethylene biosynthesis in tobacco. J Plant Physiol 95: 882

- 889. http://dx.doi.org/1 0.1104/pp.95.3.882 Larson, JL; Zak, DR; Sinsabaugh, RL. (2002). Extracellular enzyme activity beneath temperate trees growing under elevated carbon dioxide and ozone. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66: 1848

- 1856. Lawlor, DW. (1998). Plant responses to global change: Temperature and drought stress. In LJ De Kok; I Stulen (Eds.), Re sponses of plant metabolism to air pollution and global change. Leiden, The Netherlands: Backhuys Publishers. Leakey, ADB; Bernacchi, CJ; Ort, DR; Long, SP. (2006). Long

- term growth of soybean at elevated CO2 does not cause acclimation of stomatal conductance under fully open

- air conditions. Plant Cell Environ 29: 1794

- 1800. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1365

- 3040.2006.01556.x Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE. (1996). Methodology for calculating inputs for ozone secondary standard benefits anaylsis: Part II. Resear ch Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE. (1999). Role of concentrations and time of day in developing ozone exposure i ndices for a secondary standard. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 49: 669

- 681. Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE; Tingey, DT. (1994). Attainment and effects issues regarding alterna tive secondary ozone air quality standards. J Environ Qual 23: 1129

- 1140. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1994.00472425002300060002x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 174 June 2012 Lee, EH; Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE. (1987). Selection of the best exposure

- response model using various 7

- hour ozone exposure statistics. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lee, EH; Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE. (1988a). Evaluation of ozone

- exposure indices for relating exposure to plant production and for estimating agricultural losses. (EPA/60 0/3

- 88/039). Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lee, EH; Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE. (1988b). Evaluation of ozone exposure indices in exposure

- response modeling. Environ Pollut 53: 43

- 62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(88)90024

- 3 Lee, EH; T ingey, DT; Hogsett, WE. (1989). Interrelation of experimental exposure and ambient air quality data for comparison of ozone exposure indices and estimating agricultural losses. (EPA/600/3

- 89/047). Corvallis, OR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lee, EH; Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE; Laurence, JA. (2003a). History of tropospheric ozone for the San Bernardino Mountains of southern California, 1963

- 1999. Atmos E nviron 37: 2705

- 2717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(03)00203

- 6 Lee, EH; Tingey, DT; Waschmann , RS; Phillips, DL; Olszyk, DM; Johnson, MG; Hogsett, WE. (2009a). Seasonal and long

- term effects of CO2 and O3 on water loss in ponderosa pine and their interaction with climate and soil moisture. Tree Physiol 29: 1381

- 1393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpp071 Lee, S; Yun, SC. (2006). The ozone stress transcriptome of pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Molecules and Cells 21: 197

- 205. Lee, WS; Chevone, BI; Seiler, JR. (1990). Growth and gas exchange of loblolly pine seedlings as influenced by drought and air pollutants. Water Air Soil Pollut 51: 105

- 116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00211508 Lefohn, AS; Benedict, HM. (1982). Development of a mathematical index that describes ozone concentration, frequency and duration. Atmos Environ 16: 2529

- 2532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(82)90145

- 7 Lefohn, AS; Jackson, W; Shadwick, DS; Knudsen, HP. (1997). Effect of surface ozone exposures on vegetation grown in the southern Appalachian Mountains: Identification of possible areas of concern. Atmos Environ 31: 1695

- 1708. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S1352

- 2310(96)00258

- 0 Lefohn, AS; Laurence, JA; Kohut, RJ. (1988). A comparison of indices that describe the relationship between exposure to ozone and reduction in the yield of agricultural crops. Atmos Environ 22: 1229

- 1240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(88)90353

- 8 Lefohn, AS; Runeckles, VC. (1987). Establishing standards to protect vegetation

- ozone exposure/dose considerations. Atmos Environ 21: 561

- 568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0 004

- 6981(87)90038

- 2 Lefohn, AS; Shadwick, DS. (2000). Differences in trending estimates in the United States using several ozone metrics. In Proceedings of the 93rd Air & Waste Management Association Annual Conference and Exhibition. Pittsburgh, PA: Air & Waste Management Association. Legge, AH; Grunhage, L; Nosal, M; Ja ger, HJ; Krupa, SV. (1995). Ambient ozone and adverse crop response: An evaluation of North American and European data as they relate to exposure indices and critical levels. J Appl Bot Food Qual 69: 192

- 205. Leitao, L; Bethenod, O; Biolley, JP. (2007a). The impact of ozone on juvenile maize (Zea mays L.) plant photosynthesis: Effects on vegetative biomass, pigmentation, and carboxylases (PEPc and Rubisco). Plant Biol (Stuttg) 9: 478

- 488. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2007

- 964942 Leitao, L; Delacote, E; Dizengremel, P; Le Thiec, D; Biolley, JP. (2007b). Assessment of the impact of increasing concentrations of ozone on photosynthetic components of maize (Zea mays L.), a C

- 4 plant. Environ Pollut 146: 5

- 8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.05.019 Leitao, L; Maoret, JJ; Biolley, JP. (2007c). Changes in PEP carboxylase, rubisco and rubisco activase mRNA leve ls from maize (Zea mays) exposed to a chronic ozone stress. Biol Res 40: 137

- 153. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0716

- 97602007000200005 Lesser, VM; Rawlings, JO; Spruill, SE; Somerville, MC. (1990). Ozone effects on agricultural crops: Statistical methodologies and estimated dose

- response relationships. Crop Sci 30: 148

- 155. Leuning, R; Unsworth, MH; Neumann, HN; King, KM. (1979). Ozone fluxes to tobacco and soil under field conditions. Atmos Environ 13: 1155

- 1163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(79)90039

- 8 Levine, JS; Pinto, JP. (1998). The production of CO by biomass burning. In MAK Khalil; JP Pinto; MJ Shearer (Eds.), Atmospheric carbon monoxide and its environmental effects: Proceedings of the international conference; December 1997; Portland, Oregon (pp. 251

- 256). Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Of fice of Research and Development.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 175 June 2012 Lewis, JS; Ditchkoff, SS; Lin, JC; Muntifering, RB; Chappelka, AH. (2006). Nutritive quality of big bluestem (Andropogon ger ardii) and eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) exposed to tropospheric ozone. Rangeland Ecol Manag 59: 267

- 274. Li, PH; Mane, SP; Sioson, AA; Robinet, CV; Heath, LS; Bohnert, HJ; Grene, R. (2006b). Effects of chronic ozone exposure on gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana ecotypes and in Thellungielia halophila. Plant Cell Environ 29: 854

- 868. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2005.01465.x Lin, JC; Nosal, M; Muntifering, RB; Krupa, SV. (2007). Alfalfa nutritive quality for ruminant livestock as influenced by ambient air quality in west

- central Alberta. Environ Pollut 149: 99

- 103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.12.009 Lindroth, RL. (2010). Impacts of elevated atmospheric CO2 and O3 on forests: Phytochemistry, trophic interactions, and ecosystem dynamics. J Chem Ecol 36: 21

- Feb. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886

- 009

- 9731

- 4 Liu, L; King, J; Giardina, C. (2005). Effects of elevated concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3 on leaf litter production and chemistry in trembling aspen and paper birch communities. Tree Physiol 25: 1511

- 1522. Liu, L; King, JS; Giardina, CP. (2007a). Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3 on nutrient dynamics: Decomposition of leaf litter in termbling aspen and paper birch communities. Plant Soil 299: 65

- 8 2. Liu, LL; King, JS; Giardina, CP; Booker, FL. (2009b). The influence of chemistry, production and community composition on leaf litter decomposition under e levated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O

- 3 in a northern hardwood ecosystem. Ecosystems 12: 401

- 416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10021

- 009

- 9231

- y Loats, KV; Rebbeck, J. (1999). Interactive effects of ozone and elevated carbon dioxide on the growth and physiology of black cherry, green ash, and yellow poplar seedlings. Environ Pollut 106: 237

- 248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(99)00069

- X Long, SP. (1991). Modification of the response of ph otosynthetic productivity to rising temperature by atmospheric CO2 concentrations: Has its importance been underestimated? Plant Cell Environ 14: 729

- 739. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3 040.1991.tb01439.x Loranger, GI; Pregitzer, KS; King, JS. (2004). Elevated CO2 and O3t concentrations differentially affect selected groups of the fauna in temp erate forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem 36: 1521

- 1524. Lorenzini, G; Nali, C. (1995). Analysis of vertical ozone and nitrogen oxides profiles in a Prunus cerasif era canopy. Int J Biometeorol 39: 1

- 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01320885 Loreto, F; Fares, S. (2007). Is ozone flux inside leaves only a damage indicator? Clues from volatile isoprenoid studies. Plant Physiol 143: 1096

- 1100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.091892 Loreto, F; Velikova, V. (2001). Isoprene produced by leaves protects the photosynthetic apparatus against ozone damage, quenches ozone products, and reduces lipid peroxidation of cellular membranes. Pl ant Physiol 127: 1781

- 1787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.010497 Low, M; Herbinger, K; Nunn, AJ; Haberle, KH; Leu chner, M; Heerdt, C; Werner, H; Wipfler, P; Pretzsch, H; Tausz, M; Matyssek, R. (2006). Extraordinary drought of 2003 overrules ozone impact on adult beech trees (Fagus sylvatica). Trees Struct Funct 20: 539

- 548. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00468

- 006

- 0069

- z Loya, WM; Pregitzer, KS; Karberg, NJ; King, JS; Giardina, CP. (2003). Reduction of soil carbon for mation by tropospheric ozone under elevated carbon dioxide. Nature 425: 705

- 707. Ludwikow, A; Gallois, P; Sadowski, J. (2004). Ozone

- induced oxidative stress response in Arabidopsis: Transcription profiling by microarray approach. Cell Mol Biol Lett 9: 829

- 842. Ludwikow, A; Kier zek, D; Gallois, P; Zeef, L; Sadowski, J. (2009). Gene expression profiling of ozone

treated Arabidopsis abi1td insertional mutant: Protein phosphatase 2C ABI1 modulates biosynthesis ratio of ABA and ethylene. Planta 230: 1003

- 1017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425

- 009

- 1001

- 8 Ludwikow, A; Sadowski, J. (2008). Gene networks in plant ozone stress respons e and tolerance. J Integr Plant Biol 50: 1256

- 1267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744

- 7909.2008.00738.x Luo, Y. (2001). Transient ecosystem response to free

- air CO2 enrichment (FACE): Experimental evidence and methods of analysis. New Phytol 152: 3

- 8. Luo, Y ; Reynolds, JF. (1999). Validity of extrapolating field CO2 experiments to predict carbon sequestration in natural ecosystems. Ecology 80: 1568

- 1583. Lyons, TM ; Barnes, JD. (1998). Influence of plant age on ozone resistance in Plantago major. New Phytol 138: 83

- 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.1998.00879.x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 176 June 2012 Maggio, A; Chiaranda, FQ; Cefariello, R; Fagnano, M. (2009). Responses to ozone pollution of alfalfa exposed to increasing salinity levels. Environ Pollut 157: 1445

- 1452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.09.013 Mahalingam, R; Jambunathan, N; Gunjan, SK; Faustin, E; Weng, H; Ayoubi, P. (2006). Analysis of oxidative signalling induced by ozone in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Environ 29: 1357

- 1371. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2006.01516.x Mahalingam, R; Shah, N; Scrymgeour, A; Fedoroff, N. (2005). Temporal evolution of the Arabidopsis oxidative stress response. Plant Mol Biol 57: 709

- 730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11103

- 005

- 2860

- 4 Maier

- Maercker, U. (1998). Predisposition of trees to drought stress by ozone. Tree Physiol 19: 71

- 78. Mandl, RH; Laurence, JA; Kohut, RJ. (1989). Development and testing of ope n

- top chambers for exposing large, perennial plants to air pollutants. J Environ Qual 18: 534

- 540. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq1989.00472425001800040026x Mandl, RH; Weinstein, LH; McCune, DC; Keveny, M. (1973). A cylindrical, open

- top chamber for the exposure of plants to air pollutants in the field. J Environ Qual 2: 371

- 376. Maňkovská, B; Percy, KE; Karnosky, DF. (2005). Impacts of greenhouse gases on epicuticular waxes of Populus tremuloides Michx.: Results from an open

- air exposure and a natura l O3 gradient. Environ Pollut 137: 580

- 586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.01.043 Manning, WJ

. (2003). Detecting plant effects is necessary to give biological significance to ambient ozone monitoring data and predictive ozone standards. Environ Pollut 126: 375

- 379. Manning, WJ; Krupa, SV. (1992). Experimental methodology for studying the effects of ozone on crops and trees. In AS Lefohn (Ed.), Surface level ozone exposures and their effects on vegetation (pp. 93

- 156). Chelsea, MI: Lewis Publishers. Martin, MJ; Host, GE; Lenz, KE; Isebrands, JG. (2001). Simulating the growth response of aspen to elevated ozone: A mechanistic approach to scaling a leaf

- level model of ozone effects on photosynthesis to a complex canopy architecture. Environ Pollut 115: 425

- 436. Massman, WJ. (2004). Toward an ozone standard to prote ct vegetation based on effective dose: A review of deposition resistances and a possible metric [Review]. Atmos Environ 38: 2323

- 2337. Massman, WJ; Grantz, DA. (1995). Estimating canopy conductance to ozone uptake from observations of evapotranspiration at the canopy scale and at the leaf scale. Global Change Biol 1: 183

- 198. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1365

- 2486.1995.tb00020.x Massman, WJ; Musselman, RC; Lefohn, AS. (2000). A conceptual ozone dose

- response model to develop a standard to protect vegetat ion. Atmos Environ 34: 745

- 759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(99)00395

- 7 Matyssek, R; Gunthardt

- Goerg, MS; Maurer, S; Keller, T. (1995). Nighttime exposure to ozone reduces whole

- plant production in Betula pendula. Tree Physiol 15: 159

- 165. Mat yssek, R; Le Thiec, D; Low, M; Dizengremel, P; Nunn, AJ; Haberle, KH. (2006). Interactions between drought and O3 stress in forest trees. Plant Biol (Stuttg) 8: 11

- 17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 200 5

- 873025 Matyssek, R; Sandermann, H; Wieser, G; Booker, F; Cieslik, S; Musselman, R; Ernst, D. (2008). The challenge of making ozone risk assessment for forest trees more mechanistic. Environ Pollut 156: 567

- 582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.04.017 Matyssek, R; Wieser, G; Ceulemans, R; Rennenberg, H; Pretzsch, H; Haberer, K; Low, M; Nunn, AJ; Werner, H; Wipfler, P; Obwald, W; Nikolova, P; Hanke, DE; Kraigher, H; Tausz, M; Bahnweg, G; Kitao, M; Dieler, J; Sandermann, H; Herbinger, K; Grebenc, T; Blume nrother, M; Deckmyn, G; Grams, TEE; Heerdt, C; Leuchner, M; Fabian, P; Haberle, KH. (2010). Enhanced ozone strongly reduces carbon sink strength of adult beech (Fagus sylvatica): Resume from the free

- air fumigation study at Kranzberg Forest. Environ Pol lut 158: 2527

- 2532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.05.009 Mautz, WJ; Dohm, MR. (2004). Re spiratory and behavioral effects of ozone on a lizard and a frog. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 139: 371

- 377. McAinsh, MR; Evans, NH; Montgomery, LT; North, KA. (2002). Calcium signalling in stomatal responses to pollutants. New Phytol 153: 441

- 447. McBride, JR; Laven, RD. (1999). Impact of oxidant air po llutants on forest succession in the mixed conifer forests of the San Bernardino Mountains. In PR Miller; JR McBride (Eds.), Oxidant air pollution impacts in the montane forests of southern California: A case study of the San Bernardino Mountains (pp. 338

- 352). New York, NY: Springer

- Verlag.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 177 June 2012 McCarthy, HR; Oren, R; Johnsen, KH; Gallet

- Budynek, A; Pritchard, SG; Cook, CW; LaDeau, SL; Jackson, RB; Finzi, AC. (2009 ). Re

- assessment of plant carbon dynamics at the Duke free

- air CO2 enrichment site: Interactions of atmospheric [CO2] with nitrogen and water availability over stand development. New Phytol 185: 514

- 528. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2009.03078.x McCool, PM; Musselman, RC; Younglove, T; Teso, RR. (1988). Response of kidney bean to sequential ozone exposures. Environ Exp Bot 28: 307

- 313. McFrederick, QS; Fuentes, JD; Roulston, T; Kathilankal, JC; Lerdau, M. (2009). Effects of air pollution on biog enic volatiles and ecological interactions. Oecologia 160: 411

- 420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 009

- 1318

- 9 McFrederick, QS; Kathilankal, JC; Fuentes, JD. (2008). Air pollution modifies floral scent trails. Atmos Environ 42: 2336

- 2348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.12.033 McLaughlin, SB; Nosal, M; Wullschleger, SD; Sun, G. (2007a). Interactive effects of ozone and climate on tree growth and water use in a southern Appalachian forest in the USA. New Phytol 174: 109

- 124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2007.02018.x McLaughli n, SB; Wullschleger, SD; Sun, G; Nosal, M. (2007b). Interactive effects of ozone and climate on water use, soil moisture content and streamflow in a southern Appalachian forest in the USA. New Phytol 174: 125

- 136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2007.01970.x McLeod, AR; Long, SP. (1999). Free

- air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) in global change research: A review. Adv Ecol Res 28: 1

- 56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065

- 2504(08)60028

- 8 Me dlyn, BE; Barton, CVM; Broadmeadow, MSJ; Ceulemans, R; De Angelis, P; Forstreuter, M; Freeman, M; Jackson, SB; Kellomaki, S; Laitat, E; Rey, A; Roberntz, P; Sigurdsson, BD; Strassemeyer, J; Wang, K; Curtis, PS; Jarvis, PG. (2001). Stomatal conductance o f forest species after long

- term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration: A synthesis. New Phytol 149: 247

- 264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2001.00028.x Meehan, TD; Crossley, MS; Lindroth, RL. (2010). Impacts of elevated CO2 and O3 on aspen leaf litter chemistry and earthworm and springtail productivity. Soil Biol Biochem 42: 1132

- 1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.03.019 Menendez, AI; Romero, AM; Folcia, AM; Martinez

- Ghersa, MA. (2009). Getting the interactions right: Will higher O3 levels interfere with induced defenses to aphid feeding? Basic Appl Ecol 10: 255

- 264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2008.03.010 Menendez, AI; Romero, AM; Folcia, AM; Martinez

- Ghersa, MA. (2010). Aphid and episodic O3 injury in arugula plants (Eruca sativa Mill) grown in open

- top field c hambers. Agric Ecosyst Environ 135: 10

- 14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2009.08.005 Mereu, S; Geros a, G; Finco, A; Fusaro, L; Muys, B; Manes, F. (2009). Improved sapflow methodology reveals considerable night

- time ozone uptake by Mediterranean species. Biogeosciences 6: 3151

- 3162. http://dx.doi.o rg/10.5194/bg

- 6

- 3151

- 2009 Miles, GP; Samuel, MA; Zhang, YL; Ellis, BE. (2005). RNA interference

- based (RNAi) suppression of AtMPK6, an Arabidopsis mitogen

- acti vated protein kinase, results in hypersensitivity to ozone and misregulation of AtMPK3. Environ Pollut 138: 230

- 237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.04.017 Miller, PL. (1973). Oxidant

- induced community change in a mixed conifer forest. In JA Naegele (Ed.), Air pollution damage to vegetation (pp. 101

- 117). Washington, DC: American Chemical Societ y. Miller, PR; McCutchan, MH; Ryan, BC. (1972). Influence of climate and topography on oxidant air pollution concentrations that damage conifer forests in sout hern California. Mitt Forstl Bundesversuchsanst Wien 97: 585

- 607. Miller, PR; Parmeter, JR, Jr; Taylor, OC; Cardiff, EA. (1963). Ozone injury to the foliage of Pinus ponderosa. Phytopathology 53: 1072

- 1076. Miller, PR; Rechel, J. (1999). Temporal changes in crown condition indices, needle litterfall, and collateral

n eedle injuries of Ponderosa and Jeffrey pines. In PR Miller; JR McBride (Eds.), Oxidant air pollution impacts in the montane forests of southern California: A case study of the San Bernardino Mountains (pp. 164

- 178). New York, NY: Springer. Mills, G. (2002). Modification of plant response by environmental conditions. In JNB Bell; M Treshow (Eds.), Air pollution and plant life (2nd ed., pp. 343

- 358). Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 178 June 2012 Mills, G; Ball, G; Hayes, F; Fuhrer, J; Skarby, L; Gimeno, B; De Temmerman, L. (2000). Development of a multi

- factor model f or predicting the effects of ambient ozone on the biomass of white clover. Environ Pollut 109: 533

- 542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(00)00057

- 9 Mills, G; Buse, A; Gimeno, B; Bermejo, V; Holland, M; Emberson, L; Pleijel, H. (2007a). A synthesis of AOT40

- based response functions and critical levels of ozone for ag ricultural and horticultural crops. Atmos Environ 41: 2630

- 2643. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.11.016 Mills, G; Hayes, F; Jones, MLM; Cinderby, S. (2007b). Identifying ozone

- sensitive communities of (semi

- )natural vegetation suitable for mapping exceedance of critical levels. Environ Pollut 146: 736

- 743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.04.005 Mills, G; Hayes, F; Wilkinson, S; Davies, WJ. (2009). Chronic expo sure to increasing background ozone impairs stomatal functioning in grassland species. Global Change Biol 15: 1522

- 1533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2008.01798.x Mondor, EB; Awmack, CS; Lindroth, RL. (2010). Individual growth rates do not predict aphid population densities under altered atmospheric conditions. Agr Forest Entomol 12: 293

- 2 99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461

- 9563.2010.00478.x Mondor, EB; Tremblay, MN; Awmack, CS; Lindr oth, RL. (2004). Divergent pheromone

- mediated insect behaviour under global atmospheric change. Global Change Biol 10: 1820

- 1824. Mondor, EB; Tremblay, MN; Aw mack, CS; Lindroth, RL. (2005). Altered genotypic and phenotypic frequencies of aphid populations under enriched CO2 and O3 atmospheres. Global Change Biol 11: 1990

- 1996. http://dx.doi.org /10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.01054.x Morgan, PB; Ainsworth, EA; Long, SP. (2003). How does elevated ozone impact soybean? A meta

- analysis of photosynthesis, growth and yield. Plant Cell Environ 26: 1317

- 1328. Morgan, PB; Bernacchi, CJ; Ort, DR; Long, SP. (2004). An in vivo analysis of the effect of season

- long

open

- air e levation of ozone to anticipated 2050 levels on photosynthesis in soybean. J Plant Physiol 135: 2348

- 2357. Morgan, PB; Mies, TA; Bollero, GA; Nelson, RL; Long, SP

. (2006). Season

- long elevation of ozone concentration to projected 2050 levels under fully open

- air conditions substantially decreases the growth and production of soybean. New Phytol 170: 333

- 343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2006.01679.x Morison, JIL; Lawlor, DW. (1999). Interactions between increasing CO2 concentration and temperature on plant growth. Plant Cell Environ 22: 659

- 682. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 3040.1999.00443.x Morsky, SK; Haapala, JK; Rinnan, R; Tiiva, P; Saarnio, S; Silvola, J; Holopainen, T; Martikainen, PJ. (2008). Long

- term ozone effects on vegetation, microbial community and me thane dynamics of boreal peatland microcosms in open

- field conditions. Global Change Biol 14: 1891

- 1903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2008.01615.x Mudd, JB. (1996). Biochemical basis for the toxicity of ozone. In M Yunus; M Iqbal (Eds.), Plant response to air pollution (pp. 267

- 283). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Muntifering, RB; Chappelka, AH; Lin, JC; Karnosky, DF; Somers, GL. (2006a). Chemical composition and digestibility of Trifolium exposed to elevated ozone and carbon dioxide in a free

- air (FACE) fumigation system. Funct Ecol 20: 269

- 275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2435.2006.01093.x Muntifering, RB; Manning, WJ; Lin, JC; Robinson, GB. (2006b). Short

- term exposure to ozone altered the relative feed value of an alfalfa cultivar. Environ Pollut 140: 1

- 3. Musselman, RC; Lefohn, AS; Massman, WJ; Heath, RL. (2006). A critical review and analysis of the use of

exposure

- and flux

- based ozone indices for predicting vegetation effects [Review]. Atmos Environ 40: 1869

- 1888. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.10.064 Musselman, RC; Massman, WJ. (1999). Ozone flux to vegetation a nd its relationship to plant response and ambient air quality standards. Atmos Environ 33: 65

- 73. Musselman, RC; McCool, PM; Younglove, T. (1988). Selecting oz one exposure statistics for determining crop yield loss from air pollutants. Environ Pollut 53: 63

- 78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(88)90025

- 5 Musselman, RC; Minnick, TJ. (2000). Nocturnal stomatal conductance and ambient air quality standards for ozone. Atmos Environ 34: 719

- 733. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(99)00355

- 6 Nali, C; Balducci, E; Frati, L; Paoli, L; Loppi, S; Lorenzini, G. (2007). Integrated biomonitoring of air quali ty with plants and lichens: A case study on ambient ozone from central Italy. Chemosphere 67: 2169

- 2176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.12.036

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 179 June 2012 NAPAP (National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program). (1987). Diagnosing injury to Eastern forest trees: A manual for identifying damage caused by air pollution, pathogens, insects, and abio tic stresses. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University. Nash, TH, III. (2008). Lichen sensitivity to air pollution. In Lichen Biology. Cambridge, Un ited Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Neufeld, HS; Lee, EH; Renfro, JR; Hacker, WD. (2000). Seedling insensitivity to ozone for three conifer species nativ e to Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Pollut 108: 141

- 151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(99)00247

- X Neufeld, HS; Lee, EH; Renfro, JR; Hacker, WD; Yu, BH. (1995). Sensitivity of seedlings of black cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh) to ozone in Great Smoky Mountains National Park I Exposure

- response curves for biomass. New Phytol 130: 447

- 4 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1995.tb01839.x Neufeld, HS; Renfro, JR; Hacker, WD; Si lsbee, D. (1992). Ozone in Great Smoky Mountains National Park: Dynamics and effects on plants. In RL Berglund (Ed.), Tropospheric ozone and the environment II: Effects, modeling and control (pp. 594

- 617). Pittsburgh, PA: Air & Waste Management Associat ion. Nikolova, PS; Andersen, CP; Blaschke, H; Matyssek, R; Häberle, KH. (2010). Belowground effects of enhanced tropospheric ozone and drought in a beech/spru ce forest (Fagus sylvatica L./Picea abies [L.] Karst). Environ Pollut 158: 1071

- 1078. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.07.036 Noctor, G; Foyer, CH. (1998). Ascorbate and glutathione: Keeping active oxygen under control. 49: 249

- 279. Norby, RJ; DeLucia , EH; Gielen, B; Calfapietra, C; Giardina, CP; King, JS; Ledford, J; McCarthy, HR; Moore, DJP; Ceulemans, R; De Angelis, P; Finzi, AC; Karnosky, DF; Kubiske, ME; Lukac, M; Pregitzer, KS; Scarascia

- Mugnozza, GE; Schlesinger, WH; Oren, R. (2005). Forest r esponse to elevated CO2 is conserved across a broad range of productivity. PNAS 102: 18052

- 18056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0509478102 Novak, K; Cherubini, P; Saurer, M; Fuhrer, J; Skelly, JM; Kräuchi, N; Schaub, M. (2007). Ozone air pollution effects on tree

- ring growth, delta(13)C, visible foliar injury and leaf gas exchange in three

ozone

- sensitive woody plant species. Tree Physiol 27: 941

- 949. NPS (U.S. National Park Service). (2006). Ozone bioindicators. Washington, DC. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Pubs/bioindicators/index.cfm NPS (U.S. National Park Servi ce). (2007). Ozone effects studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/studies/ecoOzone.cfm Nunn, AJ; Reiter, IM; Haberle, KH; Werner, H; Langebartels, C; Sandermann, H; Heerdt, C; Fabian, P; Matyssek, R. (2002). Free

- air ozone canopy fumigation in an old

- growth mixed forest: concept and observations in beech. Phyton (Buenos Aires) 42: 105

- 119. Nussbaum, S; Geissmann, M; Fuhrer, J. (1995). Ozone exposure

- response relationships for mixtures of perennial ryegrass and white clover depend on ozone exposure patterns. Atmos Environ 29: 989

- 995. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1352

- 2310(94)00368

- U O'Gara, PJ. (1922). Sulfur dioxide and fume problems and their solution. J Ind Eng Chem 14: 744

- 745. O'Neill, B F; Zangerl, AR; Delucia, EH; Berenbaum, MR. (2008). Longevity and fecundity of Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica) on foliage grown under elevated carbon dioxide. Environ Entomol 37: 601

- 607. O'Neill, BF; Zangerl, AR; Dermody, O; Bilgin, DD; Casteel, CL; Zavala, JA; DeLucia, EH; Berenbaum, MR. (2010). Impact of elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 and herbivory on flavonoids of soybean (Glycine max Linnaeus). J Chem Ecol 36: 35

- 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886

- 009

- 9727

- 0 Ogawa, D; Nakajima, N; Sano, T; Tamao ki, M; Aono, M; Kubo, A; Kanna, M; Ioki, M; Kamada, H; Saji, H. (2005). Salicylic acid accumulation under O

- 3 exposure is regulated by ethylene in tobacco plants. Plant Cell Physiol 46: 1062

- 1072. http: //dx.doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pci118 Oksanen, E. (2003). Responses of selected birch (Betula pendula Roth) clones to ozone change over time. Plant Cell Environ 26: 875

- 886. Oksanen, E; Holopainen, T. (2001). Responses of two birch (Betula pendula Roth) clones to different ozone profiles with similar AOT40 exposure. Atmos Environ 35: 5245

- 5254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(01)00346

- 6 Olbrich, M; Betz, G; Gerstner, E; Langebartels, C; Sandermann, H; Ernst, D. (2005). Transcriptome analysis of ozone

- responsive genes in leaves of European beech (Fagu s sylvatica L.). Plant Biol (Stuttg) 7: 670

- 676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s

- 2005

- 873001

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 180 June 2012 Olbrich, M; Gerstne r, E; Bahnweg, G; Haberle, KH; Matyssek, R; Welzl, G; Heller, W; Ernst, D. (2010). Transcriptional signatures in leaves of adult European beech trees (Fagus sylvatica L.) in an experimentally enhanced free air ozone setting. Environ Pollut 158: 977

- 982. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.08.001 Olbrich, M; Gerstner, E; Welzl, G; Winkler, JB; Ernst , D. (2009). Transcript responses in leaves of ozone

treated beech saplings seasons at an outdoor free air model fumigation site over two growing seasons. Plant Soil 323: 61

- 74. http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s11104

- 009

- 0129

- 4 Ollinger, SV; Aber, JD; Reich, PB. (1997a). Simulating ozone effects on forest productivity: Interactions among leaf

- and stand

- level processes. Ecol Appl 123: 351

- 358. Ollinger, SV; Aber, JD; Reich, PB. (1997b). Simulating ozone effects on forest productivity: Interactions among leaf

- , cano py

- , and stand

- level processes. Ecol Appl 7: 1237

- 1251. Ollinger, SV; Aber, JD; Reich, PB; Freuder, RJ. (2002). Interactive effects of nitrogen deposition,

tr opospheric ozone, elevated CO2 and land use history on the carbon dynamics of northern hardwood forests. Global Change Biol 8: 545

- 562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 2486.2002.00482.x Olszyk, DM; Kats, G; Dawson, PJ; Bytnerowicz, A; Wolf, J; Thompson, CR. (1986). Characteristics of air exclusion systems vs chambers for field air pollution studies . J Environ Qual 15: 326

- 334. Omasa, K; Shimazaki, KI; Aiga, I; Larcher, W; Onoe, M. (1987). Image analysis of chlorophyll fluorescence transients for diagnosing the photosynthetic system of attached leaves. Plant Physiol 84: 748

- 752. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.84.3.748 Orendovici

- Best, T; Skelly, JM; Davis, DD; Ferdinand, JA; Savage, JE; Stevenson, RE. (2008). Ozone uptake (flux) as it relates to ozone

- induced foliar symptoms of Prunus sero tina and Populus maximowizii x trichocarpa. Environ Pollut 151: 79

- 92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.03.003 Orendovici, T; Skelly, JM; Ferdinand, JA; Savage, JE; Sanz, MJ; Smith, GC. (2003). Response of native plants of northeastern United States and southern Spain to ozone exposures; determining exposure/response relationships. Environ Pollut 125: 31

- 40. Oshima, RJ; Braegelmann, PK; Baldwin, DW; Van Way, V; Taylor, OC. (1977). Reduction of tomato fruit size and yield by ozone. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 1 02: 289

- 293. Oshima, RJ; Poe, MP; Braegelmann, PK; Baldwin, DW; Van Way, V. (1976). Ozone dosage

- crop loss function for alfalfa: A standardized method for asse ssing crop losses from air pollutants. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 26: 861

- 865. Overmyer, K; Brosche, M; Pellinen, R; Kuittinen, T; Tuominen, H; Ahlfors, R; Keina nen, M; Saarma, M; Scheel, D; Kangasjarvi, J. (2005). Ozone

- induced programmed cell death in the Arabidopsis radical

induced cell death1 mutant. Plant Physiol 137: 1092

- 1104. http://dx.doi.org/10.110 4/pp.104.055681 Overmyer, K; Kollist, H; Tuominen, H; Betz, C; Langebartels, C; Wingsle, G; Kangasjarvi, S; Brader, G; Mullineaux, P; Kangasjarvi, J. (2008). C omplex phenotypic profiles leading to ozone sensitivity in Arabidopsis thaliana mutants. Plant Cell Environ 31: 1237

- 1249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2008.01837.x Overmyer, K; Tuominen, H; Kettunen, R; Betz, C; Langebartels, C; Sandermann, H, Jr; Kangasjarvi, J. (2000). Ozone

- sensitive Arabidopsis rcd1 mutant reveals opposite roles for et hylene and jasmonate signaling pathways in regulating superoxide

- dependent cell death. Plant Cell 12: 1849

- 1862. http://dx.doi.org/10.1105/tpc.12.10.1849 Pan, YD; Birdsey, R; Hom, J; McCullough, K. (2009). Separating effects of changes in atmospheric composition, climate and land

- use on carbon sequestration of US Mid

- Atlantic temperate forests. For Ecol Mana ge 259: 151

- 164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.049 Panek, J; Kurpius, MR; Goldstein, AH. (2002). An evaluation of ozone exposure metrics for a seasonally drought

- stressed ponderosa pine ecosystem. Environ Pollut 117: 93

- 100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(01)00155

- 5 Panek, JA. (2004). Ozone uptake, water loss and carbon exchange dynamics in annually drought

- stressed Pinus ponderosa forests: Measured trends and parameters for uptak e modeling. Tree Physiol 24: 277

- 290. Panek, JA; Goldstein, AH. (2001). Responses of stomatal conductance to drought in ponderosa pine: Implications for carbon and ozone uptake. Tree Physiol 21: 337

- 344. Paolacci, AR; Mirald i, C; Tanzarella, OA; Badiani, M; Porceddu, E; Nali, C; Lorenzini, G; Ciaffi, M. (2007). Gene expression induced by chronic ozone in the Mediterranean shrub Phillyrea latifolia: Analysis by cDNA

- AFLP. Tree Physiol 27: 1541

- 1550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/27.11.1541

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 181 June 2012 Paoletti, E; Grulke, NE. (2005). Does living in elevated CO2 ameliorate tree response to ozone? A review on stomatal responses [Review]. Environ Pollut 137: 483

- 493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.01.035 Paoletti, E; Grulke, NE. (2010). Ozone exposure and stomatal sluggishness in different plant physiognomic classes. Environ Pollut 158: 2664

- 2671. http://dx.d oi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.04.024 Paoletti, E; Manning, WJ. (2007). Toward a biologically significant and usable standard for ozone that will also protect pl ants. Environ Pollut 150: 85

- 95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.037 Paoletti, E; Seufert, G; Della Rocca, G; Thomsen, H. (2007). Photosynthetic responses to elevated CO2 and O

- 3 in Quercus ilex leaves at a natural CO2 spring. Environ Pollut 147: 516

- 524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envpol.2006.08.039 Parsons, WFJ; Bockheim, JG; Lindroth, RL. (2008). Independent, interactive, and species

- specific responses of leaf litter decomposition to elevated CO2 and O3 in a northern hardwood forest. Ecosystems 11: 505

- 519. Pearson, M; Mansfield, TA. (1993). Interacting effects of ozone and water stress on the stomatal resistance of beech (Fagus sylvatica L). New Phytol 123: 351

- 358. http://dx.do i.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1993.tb03745.x Pearson, S; Davison, AW; Reiling, K; Ashenden, T; Ollerenshaw, JH. (1996). The effects of different ozone

exposures on three contrasting populations of Plantago major. New Phytol 132: 493

- 502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1996.tb01869.x Pei, ZM; Murata, Y; Benning, G; Thomine, S; Klüsener, B; Allen, GJ; Grill, E; Schroeder, JI. (2000). Calcium channels activated by hydrogen peroxide mediate abscisic acid signalling in guard cells. Nature 406: 731

- 734. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35021067 Pell, EJ; Sinn, JP; Brendley, BW; Samuelson, L; Vinten

- Johansen, C; Tien, M; Skil lman, J. (1999). Differential response of four tree species to ozone

- induced acceleration of foliar senescence. Plant Cell Environ 22: 779

- 790. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 3040.1999.0 0449.x Peltonen, PA; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Vapaavuori, E; Holopainen, JK. (2006). Effects of elevated carbon dioxide and ozone on aphid oviposition preference an d birch bud exudate phenolics. Global Change Biol 12: 1670

- 1679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2006.01226.x Peltonen, PA; Vapaavuori, E; Heinonen, J; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Holopainen, JK. (2010). Do elevated atmospheric CO2 and O

- 3 affect food quality and performance of folivorous insects on silver birch? Global Change Biol 16: 918

- 935. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2009.02073.x Percy, KE; Nosal, M; Heilman, W; Dann, T; Sober, J; Legge, AH; Karnosky, DF. (2007). New exposure

based metric approach for evaluating O3 risk to North American aspen forests. Environ Pollut 147: 554

- 566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.10.009 Peterson, DL; Arbaugh, MJ; Wakefield, VA; Miller, PR. (1987). Evidence of growth reduction in ozone

injured Jeffr ey pine (Pinus jeffreyi Grev and Balf) in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 37: 906

- 912. Pfleeger, TG; Plocher, M; Bichel, P. ( 2010). Response of pioneer plant communities to elevated ozone exposure. Agric Ecosyst Environ 138: 116

- 126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2010.04.009 Phillips, DL; Johnson, MG; Tingey, DT; Storm, MJ. (2009). Elevated CO2 and O3 effects on fine

- root survivorship in ponderosa pine mesocosms. Oecologia 160: 827

- 837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 009

- 1339

- 4 Phillips, RL; Zak, DR; Holmes, WE; White, DC. (2002). Microbial community composition and funct ion beneath temperate trees exposed to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and ozone. Oecologia 131: 236

- 244. Piikki, K; De Temmerman, L; Hogy, P; Pleijel, H. (2008a). The open

- top chamber impact on vapour pressure deficit and its consequences for stomatal ozone uptake. Atmos Environ 42: 6513

- 6522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.04.014 Piikki, K; De Temmerman, L; Ojanpera, K; Danielsson, H; Pleijel, H. (2008b). The grain quality of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in relation to elevated ozo ne uptake and carbon dioxide exposure. Eur J Agron 28: 245

- 254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2007.07.004 Piikki, K; Vorne, V; Ojanpera, K; Pleijel, H. (2007). Impact of elevated O3 and CO2 exposure on potato (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Bintje) tuber macronutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca). Agric Ecosyst Environ 118: 55

- 64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.04.012

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 182 June 2012 Pinto, DM; Blande, JD; Nykanen, R; Dong, WX; Nerg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2007a). Ozone degrade s common herbivore

- induced plant volatiles: Does this affect herbivore prey location by predators and parasitoids? J Chem Ecol 33: 683

- 694. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886

- 007

- 9255

- 8 Pinto, DM; Blande, JD; Souza, SR; Nerg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2010). Plant volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in ozone (O3) polluted atmospheres: The ecological effects. J Chem Ecol 36: 22

- 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886

- 009

- 9732

- 3 Pinto, DM; Himanen, SJ; Nissinen, A; N erg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2008). Host location behavior of Cotesia plutellae Kurdjumov (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in ambient and moderately elevated ozone in field conditions. Environ Pollut 156: 227

- 231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.12.009 Pinto, DM; Nerg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2007b). The role of ozone

- reactive compounds, terpenes, and gr een leaf volatiles (GLVs), in the orientation of Cotesia plutellae. J Chem Ecol 33: 2218

- 2228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886

- 007

- 9376

- 0 Pinto, J. (2009). Wyoming winter smog. Nat Geosci 2: 88

- 90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ngeo430 Pleijel, H; Danielsson, H; Gelang, J; Sild, E; Sellden, G. (1998). Growth stage dependence of the grain yield response to ozone in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Agric Ecosyst Environ 70: 61

- 68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167

- 8809(97)00167

- 9 Pleijel, H; Danielsson, H; Ojanpera, K; De Temmerman, L; Hogy, P; Badiani, M; Karlsson, P E. (2004a). Relationships between ozone exposure and yield loss in European wheat and potato

-- a comparison of concentration

- and flux

- based exposure indices. Atmos Environ 38: 2259

- 2269. Pleijel, H; h, D; Ojanpera, K; De Temmerman, L; Hogy, P. (2004b). Relationships between ozone exposure and yield loss in wheat and potato

- Suggestions of critical levels for ozone effects on crops. Atmos Environ 38: 225 9

- 2269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.09.076 Pleijel, H; Ojanpera, K; Mortensen, L. ( 1997). Effects of tropospheric ozone on the yield and grain protein content of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L) in the nordic countries. Acta Agric Scand B Soil Plant Sci 47: 20

- 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09064719709362434 Plessl, M; Elstner, EF; Rennenberg, H; Habermeyer, J; Heiser, I. (2007). Influence of elevated CO2 and

ozone concen trations on late blight resistance and growth of potato plants. Environ Exp Bot 60: 447

- 457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2007.01.003 Plochl, M; Lyons, T; Ollerenshaw, J; Barnes, J. (2000). Simulating ozone detoxification in the leaf apoplast through the direct reaction with ascorbate. Planta 210: 454

- 467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/PL00008153 Pollastrini, M; Desotgiu, R; Cascio, C; Bussotti, F; Cherubini, P; Saurer, M; Gerosa, G; Marzuoli, R. (201 0). Growth and physiological responses to ozone and mild drought stress of tree species with different ecological requirements. Trees Struct Funct 24: 695

- 704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00468

- 010

- 0 439

- 4 Polle, A; Pell, EJ. (1999). Role of carbon dioxide in modifying the plant response to ozone. In Y Luo; HA Mooney (Eds.), Carbon dioxide and environmental stress (pp. 193

- 213). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press. Pregitzer, K; Loya, W; Kubiske, M; Zak, D. (2006). Soil respiration in northern forests exposed to elevat ed atmospheric carbon dioxide and ozone. Oecologia 148: 503

- 516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 006

- 0381

- 8 Pregitzer, KS; Burton, AJ; King, JS; Zak, DR. (2008). Soil respiration, root biomass, and root turnover following long

- term exposure of northern forests to elevated atmospheric Co

- 2 and tropospheric O

- 3. New Phytol 180: 153

- 161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2008.02564.x Pretzsch, H; Dieler, J; Matyssek, R; Wipfler, P. (2010). Tree and stand growth of mature Norway spruce and European beech under long

- term ozone fumigation. Environ Pollut 158: 1061

- 1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.07.035 Pritsch, K; Esperschuetz, J; Haesler, F; Raidl, S; Winkler, B; Schloter, M. (2009). Structure and activities of ectomycorrhizal and microbial communities in the rhizosphere of Fagus sylvatica under ozone and pathogen stress in a lysimeter study. Plant Soil 323: 97

- 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104

- 009

- 9972

- 6 Puckette, MC; Tang, YH; Mahalingam, R. (2008). Transcriptomic changes induced by acute ozone in resistant and sensitive Medicago truncatula accessions. BMC Plant Biol 8: 46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471

- 2229

- 8

- 46

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 183 June 2012 Pujol Pereira, EI; Chung, H; Scow, K; Sadowsky, MJ; van Kessel, C; Six, J. (2011). Soil nitrogen transformat ions under elevated atmospheric CO and O during the soybean growing season. Environ Pollut 159: 401

- 407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.10.033 Ramo, K; Kanerva, T; Ojanpera, K; Manninen, S. (2007). Growth onset, senescence, and reproductive development of meadow species in mesocosms exposed to elevated O3 and CO2. Environ Pollut 145: 850

- 860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.03.054 Rao, MV; Hale, BA; Ormrod, DP. (1995). Amelioration of ozone

- induced oxidative damage in wheat plants grown under high carbon dioxide: Role of antioxidant enzymes. J Plant Physiol 109: 421

- 432. Rawlings, JO; Cure, WW. (1985). The Weibull function as a dose

- response model to describe ozone effects on crop yields. Crop Sci 25: 807

- 814. Reich, PB. (1987). Quantifying pla nt response to ozone: A unifying theory. Tree Physiol 3: 63

- 91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/3.1.63
R eich, PB; Lassoie, JP. (1984). Effects of low level O3 exposure on leaf diffusive conductance and water

- use efficiency in hybrid poplar. Plant Cell Environ 7: 661

- 668. http://dx.doi.org/10.111 1/1365

- 3040.ep11571645 Reid, CD; Fiscus, EL. (2008). Ozone and density affect the response of biomass and seed yield to elevated CO2 in rice. Global Change Bio l 14: 60

- 76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2007.01472.x Reiling, K; Davison, AW. (1992). Effects of a short ozone exposure given at different stages in the development of Plantago major L. New Phytol 121: 643

- 647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1992.tb01135.x Reiling, K; Davison, AW. (1994). Effects of exposure to ozone at different stages in the development of Plantago major L on chlorophyll fluorescence and gas excha nge. New Phytol 128: 509

- 514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1994.tb02998.x Reinert, RA; Eason, G; Barton, J. (1997). Growth and fruiting of tomato as influenced by elevated carbon dioxide and ozone. New Phytol 137: 411

- 420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.1997.00846.x Reinert, RA; Ho, MC. (1995). Vegetative growth of soybean as affected by elevated carbon dioxide and ozone. Environ Pollut 89: 89

- 96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(94)00039

- G Ren, W; Tian, H; Chen, G; Liu, M; Zhang, C; Chappelka, AH; Pan, S. (2007a). In fluence of ozone pollution and climate variability on net primary productivity and carbon storage in China's grassland ecosystems from 1961 to 2000. Environ Pollut 149: 327

- 335. http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/j.envpol.2007.05.029 Ren, W; Tian, H; Tao, B; Chappelka, A; Sun, G; Lu, C; Liu, M; Chen, G; Xu, X. (2011). Impacts of tropospheric ozone and climate c hange on net primary productivity and net carbon exchange of China's forest ecosystems. Global Ecology and Biogeography 20: 391

- 406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1466

- 8238.2010.00606.x Ren, W; Tian, HQ; Liu, ML; Zhang, C; Chen, GS; Pan, SF; Felzer, B; Xu, XF. (2007b). Effects of tropospheric ozone pollution on net primary productivity and carbon sto rage in terrestrial ecosystems of China. J Geophys Res 112: D22S09. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008521 Rhea, L; King, J; Kubiske, M; Saliendra, N; Teclaw, R. (2010). Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3 on tree branch growth and implications for hydrologic budgeting. Environ Pollut 158: 1079

- 1087. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.08.038 Riddell, J; Padgett, PE; Nash, TH, III. (2010). Responses of the lichen Ramalina menziesi i Tayl. to ozone fumigations. In TH Nash, III (Ed.), Biology of lichens: Symbiosis, ecology, environmental monitoring, systematics, cyber applications (pp. 113

- 123). Stuttgart: J. Cramer in der Gebrüder Borntraeger Verlagsbuchhandlung. Riikonen, J; Kets, K; Darbah, J; Oksanen, E; Sober, A; Vapaavuori, E; Kubiske, ME; Nelson, N; Karnosky, DF. (2008). Carbon gain and bud physiology in Populus tremuloides and Betu la papyrifera grown under long

- term exposure to elevated concentrations of CO2 and O3. Tree Physiol 28: 243

- 254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/28.2.243 Riikonen, J; Maenpaa, M; Alavillamo, M; Silfver, T; Oksanen, E. (2009). Interactive effect of elevated temperature and O3 on antioxidant capacity and gas exchange in Bet ula pendula saplings. Planta 230: 419

- 427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425

- 009

- 0957

- 8 Rizzo, M; Bernard i, R; Salvini, M; Nali, C; Lorenzini, G; Durante, M. (2007). Identification of differentially expressed genes induced by ozone stress in sensitive and tolerant poplar hybrids. J Plant Physiol 164: 945

- 949. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2006.07.012

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 184 June 2012 Rodenkirchen, H; Gottlein, A; Kozovits, AR; Matyssek, R; Grams, TEE. (2009). Nutrient contents and

e fficiencies of beech and spruce saplings as influenced by competition and O3/CO2 regime. European Journal of Forest Research 128: 117

- 128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10342

- 008

- 0221

- y Rogers, A; Allen, DJ; Davey, PA; Morgan, PB; Ainsworth, EA; Bernacchi, CJ; Cornic, G; Dermody, OC; Dohleman, FG; Heaton, EA; Mahoney, J; Zhu, XG; Delucia, EH; Ort, DR; Long, SP. (2004). Leaf photosynthesis and carbohydrate dynamics of soybean grown throughout their life

- cycle under free

- air carbon dioxide enrichment. Plant Cell Environ 27: 449

- 458. Rowland

- Bamford, AJ. (2000). Plant responses to changing carbon dioxide and temperature. In SN Singh (Ed.), Trace gas emissions and plants (pp. 63

- 74). Dordecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Ryan, A; Cojocariu, C; Possell, M; Davies, WJ; Hewitt, CN. (2009). Defining hybrid poplar (Populus deltoides x Populus trichocarpa) tolerance to ozone: Identifying key parameters. Plant Cell Environ 32: 31

- 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2008.01897.x Ryang, SZ; Woo, SY; Kwon, SY; Kim, SH; Lee, SH; Kim, KN; Lee, DK. (2009). Changes of net photosynthesis, antioxidant enzyme activities, and antioxidant contents of Liriodendron tulipifera under elevated ozone. Photosynthetica 47: 19

- 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11099

- 009

- 0005

- 8 Samuel, MA; Ellis, BE. (2002). Double jeopardy: Both overexpression and suppression of a redox

- acti vated plant mitogen

- activated protein kinase render tobacco plants ozone sensitive. Plant Cell 14: 2059

- 2069. http://dx.doi.org/10.1105/tpc.002337 Samuel, MA; Miles, GP; Ellis, BE. (2000). Ozone treatment rapidly activates MAP kinase signalling in plants. Plant J 22: 367

- 376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1 046/j.1365

- 313x.2000.00741.x Samuel, MA; Walia, A; Mansfield, SD; Ellis, BE. (2005). Overexpression of SIPK in tobacco enhances

ozone

- induced ethylene formatio n and blocks ozone

- induced SA accumulation. J Exp Bot 56: 2195

- 2201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eri219 Samuel son, LJ; Kelly, JM. (1997). Ozone uptake in Prunus serotina, Acer rubrum and Quercus rubra forest trees of different sizes. New Phytol 136: 255

- 264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.1 997.00734.x Sánchez, MJS; Peña, GS; Lorente, VC; Gallego, TM; Albert, JC. (2001). La contaminación atmosférica en los bosques: Guía para la identificacíon de d años visibles causados por Ozono. Madrid, Spain: Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. http://www.ceam.es/VentaLibros/guia_O3/index.htm Sandermann, H. (2008). Ecotoxicology of ozone: Bioactivation of extracellular ascorbate. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 366: 271

- 274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.20 07.12.018 Sanz, J; Bermejo, V; Gimeno, BS; Elvira, S; Alonso, R. (2007). Ozone sensitivity of the Mediterranean terophyte trifolium striatum is modulated by soil nitrogen content. Atmos Environ 41: 8952

- 8962. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.08.016 Sanz, J; Muntifering, RB; Bermejo, V; Gimeno, BS; Elvira, S. (2005). Ozone and increased nitrogen supply effects on the yield and nutritive quality of Trifoli um subterraneum. Atmos Environ 39: 5899

- 5907. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.06.022 Sark ar, A; Rakwal, R; Agrawal, SB; Shibato, J; Ogawa, Y; Yoshida, Y; Agrawal, GK; Agrawal, M. (2010). Investigating the impact of elevated levels of ozone on tropical wheat using integrated phenotypical, physiological, biochemical, and proteomics approaches . J Proteome Res 9: 4565

- 4584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/Pr1002824 Saviranta, NMM; Julkunen

- Tiitto, R; Oksanen, E; Karjalainen, RO. (2010). Leaf phenolic compounds in red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) induced by exposure to moderately elevated ozone. Environ Pollut 158: 440

- 446. http://dx.doi.org/10.10 16/j.envpol.2009.08.029 Sawada, H; Kohno, Y. (2009). Differential ozone sensitivity of rice cultivars as indicated by visible injury and grain yield. Plant Bio l (Stuttg) 11: 70

- 75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1438

- 8677.2009.00233.x Scebba, F; Giuntini, D; Castagna, A; Soldatini, G; Ranieri, A. (2006). Analysing the impact of ozone on biochemical and physiological variables in plant species belonging to natural ecosystems. Environ Exp Bot 57: 89

- 97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2005.04.005 Schaub, M; Skelly, JM; Zhang, JW; Ferdinand, JA; Savage, JE; Stevenson, RE; Davis, DD; Steiner, KC. ( 2005). Physiological and foliar symptom response in the crowns of Prunus serotina, Fraxinus americana and Acer rubrum canopy trees to ambient ozone under forest conditions. Environ Pollut 133: 553

- 567. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2004.06.012 Schraudner, M; Moeder, W; Wiese, C; Van Camp, W; Inze, D; Langebartels, C; Sandermann, H, Jr. (1998). Ozon e

- induced oxidative burst in the ozone biomonitor plant, tobacco Bel W3. Plant J 16: 235

- 245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 313x.1998.00294.x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 185 June 2012 Severino, JF; Stich, K; Soja, G. (2007). Ozone stress and antioxidant substances in Trifolium repens and Centaurea jacea leaves. Environ Pollut 146: 707

- 714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.04.006 Sharkey, TD; Wiberley, AE; Donohue, AR. (2008). Isoprene emiss ion from plants: Why and how. Ann Bot 101: 5

- 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcm240 Singh, E; Tiwari, S; Agra wal, M. (2009). Effects of elevated ozone on photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of two soybean varieties: A case study to assess impacts of one component of predicted global climate change. Plant Biol (Stuttg) 11: 101

- 108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1438

- 8677.2009.00263.x Singh, E; Tiwari, S; Agrawal, M. (2010a). Variability in antioxidant and metabolite levels, growth and yield of two soybean varieties: An assessment of anticipated yield losses under projected elevation of ozone. Agric Ecosyst Environ 135: 168

- 177. http://dx.doi.or g/10.1016/j.agee.2009.09.004 Sitch, S; Cox, PM; Collins, WJ; Huntingford, C. (2007). Indirect radiative forcing of climate change through ozone effects on the l and

- carbon sink. Nature 448: 791

- 794. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature06059 Skarby, L; Ottosson, S; Karlsson, P E; Wallina, G; Sellden, G; Medina, EL; Pleijel, H. (2004). Growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies) in relation to different ozone exposure indices: A synthesis. Atmos Environ 38: 2225

- 2236. Skarby, L; Troeng, E; Bostrom, CA. (1987). Ozone uptake and effects on transpiration, net photosynthesis, and dark respiration in Scots pine. Forest Sci 33: 801

- 808. Smith, G; Coulston, J; Jepsen, E; Prichard, T. (2003). A national ozone biomonitoring program: Results from field surveys of ozone sensitive plants in northeastern forest s (1994

- 2000). Environ Monit Assess 87: 271

- 291. Soja, G; Barnes, JD; Posch, M; Vandermeiren, K; Pleijel, H; Mills, G. (2000). Phenological weighting of ozone exposures in the calculation of critical levels for wheat, bean and plantain. Environ Pollut 109: 517

- 524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0269

- 7491(00)00055

- 5 Soja, G; Reichenauer, TG; Eid, M; Soja, AM; Schaber, R; Gangl, H. (2004). Long

- term ozone exposure and ozone uptake of grapevines in open

- top chambers. Atmos Environ 38: 2313

- 2321. Somers, GL; Chappelka, AH; Rosseau, P; Renfro, JR. (1998). Empirical evidence of growth decline related to visible ozone injury. For Eco l Manage 104: 129

- 137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378

- 1127(97)00252

- 1 Souza, L; Neufeld, HS; Chappe lka, AH; Burkey, KO; Davison, AW. (2006). Seasonal development of ozone

induced foliar injury on tall milkweed (Asclepias exaltata) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Pollut 141: 175

- 183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.07.022 Stampfli, A; Fuhrer, J. (2010). Spatial heterogeneity confounded ozone

- exposure experiment in semi

- natu ral grassland. Oecologia 162: 515

- 522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 009

- 1462

- 2 Stewart, CA. (1998) Impact of ozone on the reproductive biology of Brassica campestris L and Plantago major L

. (Doctoral Dissertation). Loughborough University of Technology, England. Retrieved from http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?did=1&uin=uk.bl.ethos.299673 Stewart, CA; Black, VJ; Black, CR; Roberts, JA. (1996). Direct effects of ozone on the reprodu ctive development of Brassica species. J Plant Physiol 148: 172

- 178. Stoelken, G; Pritsch, K; Simon, J; Mueller, CW; Grams, TEE; Esperschuetz, J; Gayler, S; Bueg ger, F; Brueggemann, N; Meier, R; Zeller, B; Winkler, JB; Rennenberg, H. (2010). Enhanced ozone exposure of European beech (Fagus sylvatica) stimulates nitrogen mobilization from leaf litter and nitrogen accumulation in the soil. Plant Biosystems 144: 5 37

- 546. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11263500903429346 Street, NR; James, TM; James, T; Mikael, B; Jaakko, K; Mark, B; Taylor, G. (2011). The physiological, transcriptional and genetic responses of an ozone

- sensitive and an ozone tolerant poplar and selected extremes of their F2 progeny. Environ Pollut 159: 45

- 54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.09.027 Summers, CG; Retzlaff, WA; Stephenson, S. (1994). The effect of ozone on the mean relative grow th

- rate of Diuraphis

- noxia (Mordvilko) (Homoptera, Aphididae). J Agr Entomol 11: 181

- 187. Talhelm, AF; Pregitzer, KS; Zak, DR. (2009). Species

- specific respon ses to atmospheric carbon dioxide and tropospheric ozone mediate changes in soil carbon. Ecol Lett 12: 1219

- 1228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461

- 0248.2009.01380.x

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 186 June 2012 Tamaoki, M; Nakajima, N; Kubo, A; Aono, M; Matsuyama, T; Saji, H. (2003). Transcriptome analysis of O3

- exposed Arabidopsis reveals that multiple signal pathways act mutually antagonistic ally to induce gene expression. Plant Mol Biol 53: 443

- 456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:PLAN.0000019064.55734.52 Temple, PJ; Kupper, RS; Lennox, RW; Rohr, K. (1988). Injury and yield responses of differentially irrigated cotton to ozone. Agron J 80: 751

- 755. http://dx.doi.org /10.2134/agronj1988.00021962008000050011x Temple, PJ; Riechers, GH; Miller, PR. (1992). Foliar injury responses of ponderosa pine seedlings to ozone, wet and dr y acidic deposition, and drought. Environ Exp Bot 32: 101

- 113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098

- 8472(92)90035

- Z Theis, N; Raguso, RA. (2005). The effect of pollination on floral fragrance in thistles. J Chem Ecol 31: 2581

- 2600. Thomas, VFD; Braun, S; Fluckiger, W. (2005). Effects of simultaneous ozone exposure and nitrogen loads on carbohydrate concentrations, biomass, and growth of young spruce trees (Picea abies). Environ Pollut 137: 507

- 516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.02.002 Thomas, VFD; Braun, S; Fluckiger, W. (2006). Effects of simultaneous ozone exposure and nitrogen loads on carboh ydrate concentrations, biomass, growth, and nutrient concentrations of young beech trees (Fagus sylvatica). Environ Pollut 143: 341

- 354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.11.036 Tian, H; Melillo, J; Lu, C; Kicklighter, D; Liu, M; Ren, W; Xu, X; Chen, G; Zhang, C; Pan, S; Liu, J; Running, S. (2011). China's terrestrial carbon balance: Contribution s from multiple global change factors. Global Biogeochem Cycles 25: GB1007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003838 Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE; Lee, EH; Herstrom, AA; Azevedo, SH. (1991). An evaluation of various alternative ambient ozone standards based on crop yield loss data. In RL Berglund; DR Lawson; DJ McKee (Eds.), Tropospheric Ozone and the Environment (pp. 272

- 288). Pittsburgh, PA: Air & Waste Management Association. Tingey, DT; Hogsett, WE; Lee, EH; Laurence, JA. (2004). Stricter ozone ambient air quality stand ard has beneficial effect on ponderosa pine in California. J Environ Manage 34: 397

- 405. Tingey, DT; Johnson, MG; Lee, EH; Wise, C; Waschmann, R; Olszyk, DM; Wat rud, LS; Donegan, KK. (2006). Effects of elevated CO2 and O3 on soil respiration under ponderosa pine. Soil Biol Biochem 38: 1764

- 1778. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.12.003 Tingey, DT; McVeety, BD; Waschmann, R; Johnson, MG; Phillips, DL; Rygiewicz, PT; Olszyk, DM. (1996). A versatile sun

- lit controlled

- environment facility for studying p lant and soil processes. J Environ Qual 25: 614

- 625. Tingey, DT; Rodecap, KD; Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE; Gregg, JW. (2002). Pod development increases the ozone

sens itivity of Phaseolus vulgaris. Water Air Soil Pollut 139: 325

- 341. Tissue, DT; Griffin, KL; Ball, T. (1999). Photosynthetic adjustment in field

- grown ponderosa pine trees after six years of exposure to elevated CO2. Tree Physiol 19: 221

- 228. Tissue, DT; Thomas, RB; Strain, BR. (1997). Atmospheric CO2 enrichment incr eases growth and photosynthesis of Pinus taeda: A 4 year experiment in the field. Plant Cell Environ 20: 1123

- 1134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365

- 3040.1997.d01

- 140.x Tjoelker, MG; Volin, JC; Oleksyn, J; Reich, PB. (1995). Interaction of ozone pollution and light effects on photosynthesis in a forest canopy experiment. Plant Cell Environ 18: 895

- 905. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.1995.tb00598 .x Tobiessen, P. (1982). Dark opening of stomata in successional trees. Oecologia 52: 356

- 359. http://dx.doi .org/10.1007/BF00367959 Toet, S; Ineson, P; Peacock, S; Ashmore, M. (2011). Elevated ozone reduces methane emissions from peatland mesocosms. Global Change Biol 17: 288

- 296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2010.02267.x Tong, D; Mathur, R; Schere, K; Kang, D; Yu, S. (2007). The use of air quality forecasts to assess impacts of air pollution on crops: Methodology and case study. Atmos Environ 41: 8772

- 8784. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.060 Tong, DQ; Mauzerall, DL. (2008). Summertime state

- level source

- receptor relationships between nitrogen oxides emissions and surface ozone concentrations over the continental United States. Environ Sci Technol 42: 7976

- 7984. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es702 7636 Topa, MA; Vanderklein, DW; Corbin, A. (2001). Effects of elevated ozone and low light on diurnal and seasonal carbon gain in sugar maple. Plant Cell Enviro n 24: 663

- 677.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 187 June 2012 Torsethaugen, G; Pell, EJ; Assmann, SM. (1999). Ozone inhibits guard cell K+ channels implicated in stomatal opening. PNAS 96: 13577

- 13582. Tosti, N; Pasqualini, S; Borgogni, A; Ederli, L; Falistocco, E; Crispi, S; Paolocci, F. (2006). Gene expression profiles of O3

- treated Arabidopsis plants. Plant C ell Environ 29: 1686

- 1702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2006.01542.x Turnipseed, AA; Bur ns, SP; Moore, DJP; Hu, J; Guenther, AB; Monson, RK. (2009). Controls over ozone deposition to a high elevation subalpine forest. Agr Forest Meteorol 149: 1447

- 1459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.04.001 U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1977). Photochemical oxidant air pollutant effects on a mixe d conifer forest ecosystem: A progress report [EPA Report]. (EPA

- 600/3

- 77

- 104). Corvallis, OR. http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=20015IYP.txt U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1978a). Air quality criteria for ozone and other photochemical oxidants [EPA Report]. (EPA/600/8

- 78/004). Washington, DC. U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1984). Air quality criteria for ozone and other photochemical oxidants, volume III of V (review draft) [EPA Report]. (EPA

- 600/8

- 84

- 0 20A3). Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB85126050 U. S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1986). Air quality criteria for ozone and other photochemical oxidants [EPA Report]. (EPA

- 600/8

- 84

- 020aF

- EPA

- 600/8

- 84

- 020eF). Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB87142949 U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1996b). Air quality criteria for ozone and related photochemical oxidants, Vol. II of III [EPA Report]. (EPA/600/P

- 93/004BF). Research Triangle Park, NC. U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protectio n Agency). (1996c). Air quality criteria for ozone and related photochemical oxidants, Vol. III of III [EPA Report]. (EPA/600/P

- 93/004cF). Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.ntis.gov /search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB96185608 U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (1996e). Review of national ambient air quality standards for ozone: Asses sment of scientific and technical information: OAQPS staff paper [EPA Report]. (EPA/452/R

- 96/007). Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB96203435 U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (2006b). Air quality criteria for ozone and related photochemical oxidants [EPA Report]. (EPA/600/R

- 05/004AF). Res earch Triangle Park, NC. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=149923 U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). (2007b). Review of the national ambient air quality standards for ozone: Policy assessment of scientific and technical information: OAQPS staff paper [EPA Report]. (EPA/452/R

- 07/003). Research Triangle Park, N C. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/2007_01_ozone_staff_paper U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service,, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, . (2000). Federal land managers air quality related values work group (FLAG): Phase I report. Denver, CO: U.S. Forest Service. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/permits/flag/index.cfm Uddling, J; Hogg, AJ; Teclaw, RM; Carroll, MA; Ellsworth, DS. (2010). Stomatal uptake of O3 in aspen and

aspen

- birch forests under free

- air CO2 and O3 enrichment. Environ Pollut 158: 2023

- 2031. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.12.001 Uddling, J; Teclaw, RM; Kubiske, ME; Pregitzer, KS; Ellsworth, DS. (2008). Sap flux in pure aspen and mixed aspen

- birch forests exposed to elevated concentrations of carbon dioxide and ozone. Tree Physiol 28: 1231

- 1243. Uddling, J; Teclaw, RM; Pregitzer, KS; Ellsworth, DS. (2009). Leaf and canopy conductance in aspen and

aspen

- birch forests under free

- air enrichment of carbon dioxide and ozone. Tree Physiol 29: 1367

- 1380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpp070 UIUC (University of Illinois at Urbana

- Champain). (2010). SoyFACE. Available online at http://soyface.illinois.edu/ (accessed December 8, 2010). UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). (1988). ECE critical levels workshop; March; Bad Harzburg, Germany. Geneva, Switzerland. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (2003). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and human well

- being: A framework for assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 188 June 2012 Unsworth, MH; Heagle, AS; Heck, WW. (1984a). Gas exchange in open

- top field chambers: I. Measurement and analysis of atmospheric resistances to gas exchange. Atmos Environ 18: 373

- 380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(84)90111

- 2 Unsworth, MH; Heagle, AS; Heck, WW. (1984b). Gas excha nge in open

- top field chambers: II. Resistances to ozone uptake by soybeans. Atmos Environ 18: 381

- 385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004

- 6981(84)90112

- 4 USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). (2011). Ozone biomonitoring program. Available online at http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/fia/topics/ozone/ (access ed January 28, 2011). Vahisalu, T; Kollist, H; Wang, YF; Nishimura, N; Chan, WY; Valerio, G; Lamminmäki, A; Brosché, M; Moldau, H; Desikan, R; Schroeder, JI; Kang asjärvi, J. (2008). SLAC1 is required for plant guard cell S

- type anion channel function in stomatal signalling. Nature 452: 487

- 491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature06608 Valkama, E; Koricheva, J; Oksanen, E. (2007). Effects of elevated O3, alone and in combination with elevated CO2, on tree leaf chemistry and insect herbivore performance: A meta

- analysis. Global Change Biol 13: 184

- 201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.01284.x Van Buuren, ML; Guidi, L; Fornale, S; Ghetti, F; Franceschetti, M; Soldatini, GF; Bagni, N. (2002). Ozone

response mechanisms in tobacco: Implications of polyamine metabolism. New Phytol 156: 389

- 398. http://dx. doi.org/10.1046/j.1469

- 8137.2002.00539.x Van Dingenen, R; Dentener, FJ; Raes, F; Krol, MC; Emberson, L; Cofala, J. (2009). The global impact of ozone on agricu ltural crop yields under current and future air quality legislation. Atmos Environ 43: 604

- 618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.10.033 Vandermeiren, K; Black, C; Pleijel, H; de Temmerman, L. (2005). Impact of rising tropospheric ozone on potato: Effects on photosynthesis, growth, productivity and yield quality. Plant Cell Environ 28: 982

- 99 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2005.01316.x VanDingenen, R; Dentener, FJ; Raes, F; Krol, MC; Emberson, L; Cofala, J. (2009). The global impact of ozone on agricultural crop yields under current and future air quality legislation. Atmos Environ 43: 604

- 618. http://dx.doi.or g/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.10.033 Velikova, V; Pinelli, P; Pasqualini, S; Reale, L; Ferranti, F; Loreto, F. (2005). Isoprene decreases the concentration of nitr ic oxide in leaves exposed to elevated ozone. New Phytol 166: 419

- 426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.2005.01409.x Vickers, CE; Possell, M; Cojocariu, CI; Velikova, VB; Laothawornkitkul, J; Ryan, A; Mullineaux, PM; Hewitt, CN. (2009). Isoprene synthesis protects transgenic tobacco plants from oxidative stress. Plant Cell Environ 32: 520

- 531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2009.01946.x Vigue, LM; Lindroth, RL. (2010). Effects o f genotype, elevated CO2 and elevated O3 on aspen phytochemistry and aspen leaf beetle Chrysomela crotchi performance. Agr Forest Entomol 12: 267

- 276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1461

- 9563.20 10.00475.x Volk, M; Bungener, P; Contat, F; Montani, M; Fuhrer, J. (2006). Grassland yield declined by a quarter in 5 years of free

- air ozone fumigation. Globa l Change Biol 12: 74

- 83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2005.01083.x Volk, M; Geissmann, M; Blatter, A; Contat, F; Fuhrer, J. (2003). Design and performance of a free

- air exposure system to study long

- term effects of ozone on grasslands. Atmos Environ 37: 1341

- 1350. Volk, M; Obrist, D; Novak, K; Giger, R; Bassin, S; Fuhrer, J. (2011). Subalpine grassland carbon dioxide fluxes indicate substantial carbon losses under increased nitrogen deposition, but not at elevated ozone concentration. Global Cha nge Biol 17: 366

- 376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2010.02228.x Vollenweider, P; Woodcock , H; Kelty, MJ; Hofer, RM. (2003). Reduction of stem growth and site dependency of leaf injury in Massachusetts black cherries exhibiting ozone symptoms. Environ Pollut 125: 467

- 480. Vollsnes, AV; Kruse, OMO; Eriksen, AB; Oxaal, U; Futsaether, CM. (2010). In vivo root growth dynamics of ozone exposed Trifolium subterraneum. Environ Exp Bot 69: 183

- 188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.03.007 Vuorinen, T; Nerg, AM; Holopainen, JK. (2004). Ozone exposure triggers the emission of herbi vore

- induced plant volatiles, but does not disturb tritrophic signalling. Environ Pollut 131: 305

- 311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2004.02.027 Wallin, G; Skärby, L. (1992). The influence of ozone on the stomatal and non

- stomatal limitation of photosynthesis in Norway spruce, Picea abies (L.) Karst, exposed to soil moisture deficit. Trees Struct Funct 6: 128

- 136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00202428

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 189 June 2012 Wang, L; He, X; Chen, W. (2009b). Effects of elevated ozone on photosynthetic CO2 exchange and chlorophyll a fluorescence in leaves of Quercus mongolica grown in urban area. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 82: 478

- 481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00128

- 008

- 9606

- 3 Wang, X; Mauzerall, DL. (2004). Characterizing distributions of surface ozone and its impact on grain production in China, Japan and South Korea: 1990 and 2020. Atmos Environ 38: 4383

- 4402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.03.067 Wang, X; Ta ub, DR. (2010). Interactive effects of elevated carbon dioxide and environmental stresses on root mass fraction in plants: A meta

- analytical synthesis using pairwise techniques. Oecologia 163: 1

- 11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442

- 010

- 1572

- x Wang, X; Zheng, Q; Feng, Z; Xie, J; Feng, Z; Ouyang, Z; Manning, WJ. (2008). 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 156: 449

- 453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.env pol.2008.01.027 Watanabe, M; Yamaguchi, M; Tabe, C; Iwasaki, M; Yamashita, R; Funada, R; Fukami, M; Matsumura, H; Kohno, Y; Izuta, T. (2007). Influences of nitrogen load on the growth and photosynthetic responses of Quercus serrata seedlings to O3. Trees Struct Funct 21: 421

- 432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00468

- 007

- 0134

- 2 Weinstein, DA; Gollands, B; Retzlaff, WA. (2001). The effects of ozone on a lower slope forest of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park: Simulations linking an indiv idual tree model to a stand model. Forest Sci 47: 29

- 42. Weinstein, DA; Laurence, JA; Retzlaff, WA; Kern, JS; Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE; Weber, J. (2005). Predicti ng the effects of tropospheric ozone on regional productivity of ponderosa pine and white fir. For Ecol Manage 205: 73

- 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.007 Werner, H; Fabian, P. (2002). Free

- air fumigation of mature trees: A novel system for controlled ozone enrichment in grown

- up beech and spruce canopies. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 9: 11 7

- 121. Wesely, ML; Hicks, BB. (2000). A review of the current status of knowledge on dry deposition [Review]. Atmos Environ 34: 2261

- 2282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352

- 2310(99)00467

- 7 Whitfield, CP; Davison, AW; Ashenden, TW. (1996). Interactive effects of ozone and soil volume on Plantago major. New Phytol 134: 287

- 294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469

- 8137.1996.tb04633.x Whitfield, CP; Davison, AW; Ashenden, TW. (1997). Artificial selection and heritability of ozone resistance in two populations of Plantago major. New Phytol 137: 645

- 655. Wieser, G; Havranek, WM. (1995). Environmental control of ozone uptake in Larix decidua Mill: A comparison between different altitudes. Tree Physiol 15: 253

- 258. Wieser, G; Manning, WJ; Tausz, M; Bytnerowicz, A. (2006). Evidence for potential impacts of ozone on Pinus cembra L. at mountain sites in Europe: An overview. Environ Pollut 139: 53

- 58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.04.037 Wilkinson, S; Davies, WJ. (2010). Drought, ozone, ABA and ethylene: New insights from cell to plant to community. Plant Cell Environ 33: 510

- 525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2009.02052.x Will, RE; Ceulemans, R. (1997). Effects of elevated CO2 concentration on photosynthesis, respiration and carbohydrate status of coppice Populus hybrids. Physiol Plant 10 0: 933

- 939. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.1997.tb00020.x Winner, WE; Lefohn, AS; Cotter, IS; Greitner, CS; Nellessen, J; McEvoy, LR, Jr; Olson, RL; Atkinson, CJ; Moore, LD. (1989). Plant responses to elevational gradients of O3 exposures in Virginia. PNAS 86: 8828

- 8832. Wittig, VE; Ainsworth, EA; Long, SP. (2007). To what extent do current and projected increases in surface ozone affect photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of trees? A meta

- analytic review of the last 3 decades of experiments [Review]. Plant Cell Environ 30: 1150

- 1162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 3040.2007.01717.x W

ittig, VE; Ainsworth, EA; Naidu, SL; Karnosky, DF; Long, SP. (2009). Quantifying the impact of current and future tropospheric ozone on tree biomass, growth, physiology and biochemistry: A quantitative

meta

- analysis. Global Change Biol 15: 396

- 424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2008.01774.x Woo, SY; Hinckley, TM. (2005). The effects of o zone on growth and stomatal response in the F

- 2 generation of hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa x Populus deltoides). Biol Plantarum 49: 395

- 404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10535

- 005

- 0014

- 9

### Draft

– Do Not Cite or Quote 9

- 190 June 2012 Wright, GA; Lutmerding, A; Dudareva, N; Smith, BH. (2005). Intensity and the ratios of compounds in the scent of snapdragon flowers affect scent discrimination by hon eybees (Apis mellifera). J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol 191: 105

- 114. Yamaguchi, M; Watanabe, M; Iwasaki, M; Tabe, C; Matsumura, H; Kohno, Y; Izuta, T. (2007). Growth and photosynthetic responses of Fagus crenata seedlings to O3 under different nitrogen loads. Trees Struct Funct 21: 707

- 718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00468

- 007

- 016 3

- x Yan, K; Chen, W; He, XY; Zhang, GY; Xu, S; Wang, LL. (2010). Responses of photosynthesis, lipid peroxidation and antioxidant system in leaves of Quercus mongolica to elevated O3. Environ Exp Bot 69: 198

- 204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbo t.2010.03.008 Yoshida, S; Tamaoki, M; Ioki, M; Ogawa, D; Sato, Y; Aono, M; Kubo, A; Saji, S; Saji, H; Satoh, S; Nakajima, N. (2009). Ethylene and salicylic aci d control glutathione biosynthesis in ozone

- exposed Arabidopsis thaliana. Physiol Plant 136: 284

- 298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399

- 3054.2009.01220.x Younglove, T; McCool, PM; Musselman, RC; KahI, ME. (1994). Growth

- stage dependent crop yield response to ozone exposure. Environ Pollut 86: 287

- 295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269

- 7491(94)90169

- 4 Yuan, JS; Himanen, SJ; Holopainen, JK; Chen, F; Stewart, CN, Jr. (2009). Smelling global climate cha nge: Mitigation of function for plant volatile organic compounds. Trends Ecol Evol 24: 323

- 331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.01.012 Yun, SC; Laurence, JA. (1999). The response of sensitive and tolerant clones of Populus tremuloides to dynamic ozone exposure under controlled environmental conditions. New Phytol 143: 305

- 313. Zak, DR; Holmes, WE; Pregitzer, KS. (2007). Atmospheric CO2 and O3 alter the flow of N15 in developing forest ecosystems. Ecology 88: 2630

- 2639. Zhang, C; Tian, HQ; Chappelka, AH; Ren, W; Chen, H; Pan, SF; Liu, ML; Styers, DM; Chen, GS; Wang,
YH. (2007a). Impacts of climatic and atmospheric changes on carbon dynamics in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Environ Pollut 149: 336

- 347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.05.028 Zhang, J; Schaub, M; Ferdinand, JA; Skelly, JM; Steiner, KC; Savage, JE. (2010a). Leaf age affects the responses of foliar injury and gas exchange to tropospheric ozone in Prunus serotina seedlings. Environ Pollut 158: 2627

- 2634. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.05.003 Zheng, F; Wang, X; Lu, F; Hou, P; Zhang, W; Duan, X; Zhou, X; Ai, Y; Zheng, H ; Ouyang, Z; Feng, Z. (2011). Effects of elevated ozone concentration on methane emission from a rice paddy in Yangtze River Delta, China. Global Change Biol 17: 898

- 910. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365

- 2486.2010.02258.x