6 research outputs found

    Reply to Elmendorf and Ettinger: Photoperiod playsa dominantand irreplaceable role in triggering secondary growth resumption

    Get PDF
    In their Letter, Elmendorf and Ettinger (1) question the dominant role of photoperiod in driving secondary growth resumption (hereafter referred to as xylem formation onset) of the Northern Hemisphere conifers, recently reported by Huang et al. (2). Their opinions are grounded on the following three aspects, including 1) the seasonality of the photoperiod, 2) the dependence of the predictor variables (e.g., photoperiod, forcing, and chilling) on the response variable (the date of onset of xylem formation, day of the year [DOY]), and 3) the limited value of the obtained models for interannual forecasting. We think they bring up an interesting issue that deserves further discussion and clarification. Photoperiod is acknowledged to regulate spring bud swelling while wood formation starts (3, 4). Although photoperiod seasonality occurs at each site, its influence is marginal in our study given that the analysis involved comparisons among sites across the Northern Hemisphere. Our conclusion that photoperiod plays a dominant role was built upon the combination of several coherent pieces of evidence, rather than “the crux of Huang et al….” as they pointed out. First, we clearly stated that model 2, which modeled DOY as a function of the mean annual temperature of the site (MAT), forcing, chilling, and soil moisture, was considered the best model in terms of parsimony according to minimum Akaike information criterion and Bayesian information criterion, rather than R2 as referred to in their Letter. Second, photoperiod interacted with MAT and can explain 61.7% of the variance of MAT alone (2). Therefore, we concluded that secondary growth resumption was driven primarily by MAT and photoperiod or by their interaction, which is challenging to be disentangled without experimental data, we agree. In terms of biological functioning, they play an ..

    Outgassing History and Escape of the Martian Atmosphere and Water Inventory

    No full text
    The evolution and escape of the martian atmosphere and the planet’s water inventory can be separated into an early and late evolutionary epoch. The first epoch started from the planet’s origin and lasted ∼500 Myr. Because of the high EUV flux of the young Sun and Mars’ low gravity it was accompanied by hydrodynamic blow-off of hydrogen and strong thermal escape rates of dragged heavier species such as O and C atoms. After the main part of the protoatmosphere was lost, impact-related volatiles and mantle outgassing may have resulted in accumulation of a secondary CO2 atmosphere of a few tens to a few hundred mbar around ∼4–4.3 Gyr ago. The evolution of the atmospheric surface pressure and water inventory of such a secondary atmosphere during the second epoch which lasted from the end of the Noachian until today was most likely determined by a complex interplay of various nonthermal atmospheric escape processes, impacts, carbonate precipitation, and serpentinization during the Hesperian and Amazonian epochs which led to the present day surface pressure

    Outgassing History and Escape of the Martian Atmosphere and Water Inventory

    No full text

    Volatile Trapping in Martian Clathrates

    No full text
    corecore