Advances and perspectives of biogenic reactive trace volatile organic compounds in the context of global change

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2025.3.26

Abstract

Abstract:

Biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) are critical trace reactive organic gases in the Earth system, playing vital roles in global carbon cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate regulation. BVOCs react rapidly with atmospheric oxidants (e.g., OH, O₃, and NO₃), driving the formation of secondary organic aerosols (SOA), which modulate radiative forcing and influence regional and global climates. Furthermore, BVOCs interact with tropospheric and stratospheric ozone and alter hydroxyl radical (OH) concentrations, indirectly affecting the lifecycles of greenhouse gases. Global BVOC emissions are estimated to exceed 1000 TgC annually, with forests being the primary source and isoprene and monoterpenes dominating the emissions. Recent advancements in BVOC emission monitoring technologies have significantly improved the resolution and accuracy of emission measurements. Traditional offline sampling and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) have been complemented by high-temporal-resolution online techniques such as proton-transfer-reaction mass spectrometry (PTR-MS) and time-of-flight mass spectrometry (PTR-ToF-MS). Additionally, multi-scale monitoring tools, including drones, satellite remote sensing, and ground-based flux towers, provide unprecedented capabilities for studying the spatial and temporal dynamics of BVOC emissions. By integrating dynamic chamber methods, eddy covariance techniques, and modeling approaches, researchers are progressively refining BVOC emission inventories, paving the way for deeper insights into the complex feedback mechanisms between BVOCs and climate change.

Environmental factors regulating BVOC emissions have been extensively studied. Light and temperature are key drivers, with light intensity directly influencing photosynthesis and isoprene emissions, while rising temperatures accelerate BVOC biosynthesis and volatilization. Elevated CO₂ concentrations may modulate BVOC emissions through photosynthetic regulation and reduced stomatal conductance, although long-term effects vary by plant species and adaptive strategies. Increased ozone (O₃) concentrations exert dual effects on BVOCs, inducing stress-related defensive emissions while potentially damaging foliage and suppressing emissions. Aerosol concentrations exhibit critical positive feedback mechanisms with BVOCs—high BVOC emissions promote SOA formation, and SOA, in turn, modifies photosynthesis and BVOC emissions via light scattering effects. Changes in the nitrogen cycle also impact BVOC emissions, with elevated nitrogen inputs altering nutrient allocation and metabolic pathways, thereby enhancing or suppressing BVOC synthesis depending on the compound type.

Under future global change scenarios, climate warming, frequent extreme weather events, and rising CO₂ concentrations may significantly alter BVOC emission patterns and their coupling with atmospheric chemistry and climate systems. Advancing observation and modeling approaches to study multi-factor interactions and long-term trends in BVOC emissions is essential for elucidating the cross-sphere coupling mechanisms of BVOCs. Such research will provide critical insights into the interactions between climate change and atmospheric chemistry.

Key words: trace reactive organic gases (ROG), biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs), emission measurement, light, temperature, carbon dioxide concentration, nitrogen cycle, aerosol, ozone

CLC Number:

ZHANG Yanli, RAN Haofan, ZENG Jianqiang, LU Yuting, PANG Weihua, GUO Hao, WANG Xinming. Advances and perspectives of biogenic reactive trace volatile organic compounds in the context of global change[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2025, 32(3): 288-310.

Figures/Tables 10

References 199

[1]	DANABASOGLU G, LAMARQUE J F, BACMEISTER J, et al. The community earth system model version 2 (CESM2)[J]. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 2020; 12(2): e2019MS001916.
[2]	ZHAO T, WANG S, OUYANG C, et al. Artificial intelligence for geoscience: progress, challenges, and perspectives[J]. The Innovation, 2024, 5(5): 100691.
[3]	PARK J H, GOLDSTEIN A H, TIMKOVSKY J, et al. Active atmosphere-ecosystem exchange of the vast majority of detected volatile organic compounds[J]. Science, 2013, 341(6146): 643-647. DOI PMID
[4]	GUENTHER A B, HEWITT C N, ERICKSON D, et al. A global model of natural volatile organic compound emissions[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 1995, 100(D5): 8873-8892.
[5]	ARNETH A, HARRISON S P, ZAEHLE S, et al. Terrestrial biogeochemical feedbacks in the climate system[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2010, 3(8): 525-532.
[6]	PEÑUELAS J, MARINO G, LLUSIA J, et al. Photochemical reflectance index as an indirect estimator of foliar isoprenoid emissions at the ecosystem level[J]. Nature Communications, 2013, 4(1): 2604.
[7]	RAP A, SCOTT C E, REDDINGTON C L, et al. Enhanced global primary production by biogenic aerosol via diffuse radiation fertilization[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2018, 11(9): 640-644.
[8]	BONAN GB, DONEY SC. Climate, ecosystems, and planetary futures: the challenge to predict life in Earth system models[J]. Science, 2018, 359(6375): eaam8328.
[9]	JOKINEN T, BERNDT T, MAKKONEN R, et al. Production of extremely low volatile organic compounds from biogenic emissions: measured yields and atmospheric implications[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015, 112(23): 7123-7128. DOI PMID
[10]	GUENTHER A B, ZIMMERMAN P R, HARLEY P C, et al. Isoprene and monoterpene emission rate variability: model evaluations and sensitivity analyses[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 1993, 98(D7): 12609-12617.
[11]	ZANNONI N, LEPPLA D, LEMBO SILVEIRA DE ASSIS P I, et al. Surprising chiral composition changes over the Amazon rainforest with height, time and season[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2020, 1(1): 4.
[12]	HEALD C L, WILKINSON M J, MONSON R K, et al. Response of isoprene emission to ambient CO₂ changes and implications for global budgets[J]. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15(5): 1127-1140.
[13]	SANAEI A, HERRMANN H, ALSHAABI L, et al. Changes in biodiversity impact atmospheric chemistry and climate through plant volatiles and particles[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2023, 4(1): 445.
[14]	BAMBERGER I, RUEHR N K, SCHMITT M, et al. Isoprene emission and photosynthesis during heatwaves and drought in black locust[J]. Biogeosciences, 2017, 14(15): 3649-3667.
[15]	EDWARDS P M, AIKIN K C, DUBE W P, et al. Transition from high- to low-NO_x control of night-time oxidation in the southeastern US[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2017, 10(7): 490-495.
[16]	SHRIVASTAVA M, ANDREAE M O, ARTAXO P, et al. Urban pollution greatly enhances formation of natural aerosols over the Amazon rainforest[J]. Nature Communications, 2019, 10(1): 1046. DOI PMID
[17]	WANG P, ZHANG Y, GONG H, et al. Updating biogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) emissions with locally measured emission factors in South China and the effect on modeled ozone and secondary organic aerosol production[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2023, 128(24): e2023JD039928.
[18]	ZENG J, ZHANG Y, PANG W, et al. Optimizing in-situ measurement of representative BVOC emission factors considering intraspecific variability[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2024, 51(11): e2024GL108870.
[19]	WU J, LONG J, LIU H, et al. Biogenic volatile organic compounds from 14 landscape woody species: tree species selection in the construction of urban greenspace with forest healthcare effects[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021, 300: 113761.
[20]	SHARKEY T D, MONSON R K. Isoprene research-60 years later, the biology is still enigmatic[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2017, 40(9): 1671-1678.
[21]	GUENTHER A B, MONSON R K, FALL R. Isoprene and monoterpene emission rate variability: observations with eucalyptus and emission rate algorithm development[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 1991, 96(D6): 10799-10808.
[22]	BRILLI F, HÖRTNAGL L, BAMBERGER I, et al. Qualitative and quantitative characterization of volatile organic compound emissions from cut grass[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2012, 46(7): 3859-3865.
[23]	HARLEY P, ELLER A, GUENTHER A, et al. Observations and models of emissions of volatile terpenoid compounds from needles of ponderosa pine trees growing in situ: control by light, temperature and stomatal conductance[J]. Oecologia, 2014, 176: 35-55.
[24]	LUN X, LIN Y, CHAI F, et al. Reviews of emission of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) in Asia[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2020, 95: 266-277. DOI PMID
[25]	SUN Z, SHEN Y, NIINEMETS Ü. Responses of isoprene emission and photochemical efficiency to severe drought combined with prolonged hot weather in hybrid Populus[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2020, 71(22): 7364-7381.
[26]	CANAVAL E, MILLET DB, ZIMMER I, et al. Rapid conversion of isoprene photooxidation products in terrestrial plants[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2020, 1(1): 44.
[27]	EDTBAUER A, PFANNERSTILL E Y, PIRES FLORENTINO A P, et al. Cryptogamic organisms are a substantial source and sink for volatile organic compounds in the Amazon region[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2021, 2(1): 258.
[28]	WANG B, SHUGART H H, LERDAU M T. Complexities between plants and the atmosphere[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2019, 12(9): 693-694. DOI
[29]	DI CARLO P, BRUNE W H, MARTINEZ M, et al. Missing OH reactivity in a forest: evidence for unknown reactive biogenic VOCs[J]. Science, 2004, 304(5671): 722-725. PMID
[30]	DADA L, STOLZENBURG D, SIMON M, et al. Role of sesquiterpenes in biogenic new particle formation[J]. Science Advances, 2023, 9(36): eadi5297.
[31]	TSIGARIDIS K, DASKALAKIS N, KANAKIDOU M, et al. The AeroCom evaluation and intercomparison of organic aerosol in global models[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2014, 14(19): 10845-10895.
[32]	SPORRE M K, BLICHNER S M, SCHRÖDNER R, et al. Large difference in aerosol radiative effects from BVOC-SOA treatment in three earth system models[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2020, 20(14): 8953-8973.
[33]	CLAEYS M, GRAHAM B, VAS G, et al. Formation of secondary organic aerosols through photooxidation of isoprene[J]. Science, 2004, 303(5661): 1173-1176. PMID
[34]	CAO J, SITU S, HAO Y, et al. Enhanced summertime ozone and SOA from biogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) emissions due to vegetation biomass variability during 1981-2018 in China[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2022, 22( 4): 2351-2364.
[35]	SCOTT C E, MONKS S A, SPRACKLEN D V, et al. Impact on short-lived climate forcers increases projected warming due to deforestation[J]. Nature Communications, 2018, 9(1): 157. DOI PMID
[36]	FU B, GASSER T, LI B, et al. Short-lived climate forcers have long-term climate impacts via the carbon-climate feedback[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2020, 10(9): 851-855.
[37]	TUNVED P, HANSSON H-C, KERMINEN V-M, et al. High natural aerosol loading over boreal forests[J]. Science, 2006, 312(5771): 261-263. PMID
[38]	TANG J, ZHOU P, MILLER P A, et al. High-latitude vegetation changes will determine future plant volatile impacts on atmospheric organic aerosols[J]. NPJ Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2023, 6(1): 147.
[39]	MACHADO L A T, UNFER G R, BRILL S, et al. Frequent rainfall-induced new particle formation within the canopy in the Amazon rainforest[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2024, 17: 1225-1232.
[40]	UNGER N. Human land-use-driven reduction of forest volatiles cools global climate[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2014, 4(10): 907-910.
[41]	XU L, GUO H, BOYD C M, et al. Effects of anthropogenic emissions on aerosol formation from isoprene and monoterpenes in the southeastern United States[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015, 112(1): 37-42. DOI PMID
[42]	PYE H O T, WARD-CAVINESS C K, MURPHY B N, et al. Secondary organic aerosol association with cardiorespiratory disease mortality in the United States[J]. Nature Communications, 2021, 12(1): 7215. DOI PMID
[43]	ZHU J, PENNER J E, YU F, et al. Decrease in radiative forcing by organic aerosol nucleation, climate, and land use change[J]. Nature Communications, 2019, 10(1): 423. DOI PMID
[44]	WANG N, HUANG X, XU J, et al. Typhoon-boosted biogenic emission aggravates cross-regional ozone pollution in China[J]. Science Advances, 2022, 8(2): eabl6166.
[45]	WANG H, WU K, LIU Y, et al. Role of heat wave-induced biogenic VOC enhancements in persistent ozone episodes formation in Pearl River Delta[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2021, 126(12): e2020JD034317.
[46]	CAO Y, YUE X, LEI Y, et al. Identifying the drivers of modeling uncertainties in isoprene emissions: schemes versus meteorological forcings[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2021, 126(18): 2020JD034242.
[47]	GE J, HUANG X, ZAN B, et al. Local surface cooling from afforestation amplified by lower aerosol pollution[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2023, 16(9): 781-788.
[48]	KRAMSHØJ M, VEDEL-PETERSEN I, SCHOLLERT M, et al. Large increases in Arctic biogenic volatile emissions are a direct effect of warming[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2016, 9(5): 349-352.
[49]	JUNNINEN H, AHONEN L, BIANCHI F, et al. Terpene emissions from boreal wetlands can initiate stronger atmospheric new particle formation than boreal forests[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2022, 3(1): 93.
[50]	KRAMSHØJ M, ALBERS C N, HOLST T, et al. Biogenic volatile release from permafrost thaw is determined by the soil microbial sink[J]. Nature Communications, 2018, 9(1): 3412.
[51]	SECO R, NAGALINGAM S, JOO E, et al. The UCI Fluxtron: a versatile dynamic chamber and software system for biosphere-atmosphere exchange research[J]. Chemosphere, 2024, 364: 143061.
[52]	MATERIC D, BRUHN D, TURNER C, et al. Methods in plant foliar volatile organic compounds research[J]. Applications in Plant Sciences, 2015, 3(12): 1500044.
[53]	ZENG J, ZHANG Y, ZHANG H, et al. Design and characterization of a semi-open dynamic chamber for measuring biogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) emissions from plants[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2022, 15(1): 79-93.
[54]	ACTON W J F, JUD W, GHIRARDO A, et al. The effect of ozone fumigation on the biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) emitted from Brassica napus above- and below-ground[J]. Plos One, 2018, 13(12): e0208825.
[55]	LUPKE M, STEINBRECHER R, LEUCHNER M, et al. The tree drought emission MONitor (Tree DEMON), an innovative system for assessing biogenic volatile organic compounds emission from plants[J]. Plant Methods, 2017, 13: 14. DOI PMID
[56]	MCKINNEY K A, WANG D, YE J, et al. A sampler for atmospheric volatile organic compounds by copter unmanned aerial vehicles[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2019, 12(6): 3123-3135.
[57]	ARCHIBALD A T. Wake-up call for isoprene emissions[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2011, 4: 659-660.
[58]	PFANNERSTILL E Y, ARATA C, ZHU Q, et al. Temperature-dependent emissions dominate aerosol and ozone formation in Los Angeles[J]. Science, 2024, 384(6702): 1324-1329. DOI PMID
[59]	FARMER D K, RICHES M. Measuring biosphere-atmosphere exchange of short-lived climate forcers and their precursors[J]. Accounts of Chemical Research, 2020, 53(8): 1427-1435. DOI PMID
[60]	THOLL D, BOLAND W, HANSEL A, et al. Practical approaches to plant volatile analysis[J]. The Plant Journal, 2006, 45(4): 540-560.
[61]	ORTEGA J, HELMIG D. Approaches for quantifying reactive and low-volatility biogenic organic compound emissions by vegetation enclosure techniques: part A[J]. Chemosphere, 2008, 72(3): 343-364.
[62]	GUENTHER A B, JIANG X, HEALD C L, et al. The model of emissions of gases and aerosols from nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2012, 5(6): 1471-1492.
[63]	NIINEMETS U, KUHN U, HARLEY P C, et al. Estimations of isoprenoid emission capacity from enclosure studies: measurements, data processing, quality and standardized measurement protocols[J]. Biogeosciences, 2011, 8(8): 2209-2246.
[64]	SONG W, STAUDT M, BOURGEOIS I, et al. Laboratory and field measurements of enantiomeric monoterpene emissions as a function of chemotype, light and temperature[J]. Biogeosciences, 2014, 11(5): 1435-1447.
[65]	RICHES M, LEE D, FARMER D K. Simultaneous leaf-level measurement of trace gas emissions and photosynthesis with a portable photosynthesis system[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2020, 13(8): 4123-4139.
[66]	HELMIG D, BOCQUET F, POLLMANN J, et al. Analytical techniques for sesquiterpene emission rate studies in vegetation enclosure experiments[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2004, 38(4): 557-572.
[67]	ORTEGA J, HELMIG D, DALY R W, et al. Approaches for quantifying reactive and low-volatility biogenic organic compound emissions by vegetation enclosure techniques: part B: applications[J]. Chemosphere, 2008, 72(3): 365-380.
[68]	KOLARI P, BACK J, TAIPALE R, et al. Evaluation of accuracy in measurements of VOC emissions with dynamic chamber system[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2012, 62: 344-351.
[69]	DINDORF T, KUHN U, GANZEVELD L, et al. Significant light and temperature dependent monoterpene emissions from European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and their potential impact on the European volatile organic compound budget[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2006, 111(D16): D16305.
[70]	SCHAUB A, BLANDE J D, GRAUS M, et al. Real-time monitoring of herbivore induced volatile emissions in the field[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2010, 138(2): 123-133.
[71]	FENG Z, YUAN X, FARES S, et al. Isoprene is more affected by climate drivers than monoterpenes: a meta-analytic review on plant isoprenoid emissions[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2019, 42(6): 1939-1949.
[72]	POLLMANN J, ORTEGA J, HELMIG D. Analysis of atmospheric sesquiterpenes: sampling losses and mitigation of ozone interferences[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2005, 39(24): 9620-9629.
[73]	PACIFICO F, HARRISON S P, JONES C D, et al. Isoprene emissions and climate[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2009, 43(39): 6121-6135.
[74]	GU D, GUENTHER A B, SHILLING J E, et al. Airborne observations reveal elevational gradient in tropical forest isoprene emissions[J]. Nature Communications, 2017, 8(1): 15541.
[75]	GUENTHER A B, HILLS A J. Eddy covariance measurement of isoprene fluxes[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 1998, 103(D11): 13145-13152.
[76]	FISCHER L, BREITENLECHNER M, CANAVAL E, et al. First eddy covariance flux measurements of semi-volatile organic compounds with the PTR3-TOF-MS[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2021, 14(12): 8019-8039.
[77]	POTOSNAK M J, LESTOURGEON L, PALLARDY S G, et al. Observed and modeled ecosystem isoprene fluxes from an oak-dominated temperate forest and the influence of drought stress[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2014, 84: 314-322.
[78]	SECO R, HOLST T, DAVIE-MARTIN C L, et al. Strong isoprene emission response to temperature in tundra vegetation[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022, 119(38): e2118014119.
[79]	JARDINE K, SERRANO A Y, ARNETH A, et al. Within-canopy sesquiterpene ozonolysis in Amazonia[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2011, 116(D19): D19301.
[80]	BATISTA C E, YE J, RIBEIRO I O, et al. Intermediate-scale horizontal isoprene concentrations in the near-canopy forest atmosphere and implications for emission heterogeneity[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019, 116(39): 19318-19323. DOI PMID
[81]	YE J, BATISTA C E, ZHAO T, et al. River winds and transport of forest volatiles in the Amazonian riparian ecoregion[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2022, 56(17): 12667-12677.
[82]	NIINEMETS U, MONSON R K, ARNETH A, et al. The leaf-level emission factor of volatile isoprenoids: caveats, model algorithms, response shapes and scaling[J]. Biogeosciences, 2010, 7(6): 1809-1832.
[83]	GUENTHER A B, KARL T, HARLEY P, et al. Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (model of emissions of gases and aerosols from nature)[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2006, 6(11): 3181-3210.
[84]	HARLEY P, GUENTHER A, ZIMMERMAN P. Effects of light, temperature and canopy position on net photosynthesis and isoprene emission from sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) leaves[J]. Tree Physiology, 1996, 16(1/2): 25-32.
[85]	HARLEY P, VASCONCELLOS P, VIERLING L, et al. Variation in potential for isoprene emissions among Neotropical forest sites[J]. Global Change Biology, 2004, 10(5): 630-650.
[86]	KUHN U, ROTTENBERGER S, BIESENTHAL T, et al. Isoprene and monoterpene emissions of Amazonian tree species during the wet season: direct and indirect investigations on controlling environmental functions[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2002, 107(D20): 8071.
[87]	KARL T, GUENTHER A, YOKELSON R J, et al. The tropical forest and fire emissions experiment: emission, chemistry, and transport of biogenic volatile organic compounds in the lower atmosphere over Amazonia[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2007, 112(D18): D18302.
[88]	SARKAR C, GUENTHER A B, PARK J H, et al. PTR-TOF-MS eddy covariance measurements of isoprene and monoterpene fluxes from an eastern Amazonian rainforest[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2020, 20(12): 7179-7191.
[89]	ZENG J, ZHANG Y, MU Z, et al. Temperature and light dependency of isoprene and monoterpene emissions from tropical and subtropical trees: field observations in south China[J]. Applied Geochemistry, 2023, 155: 105727.
[90]	GERON C, OWEN S, GUENTHER A, et al. Volatile organic compounds from vegetation in southern Yunnan Province, China: emission rates and some potential regional implications[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2006, 40(10): 1759-1773.
[91]	OKU H, FUKUTA M, IWASAKI H, et al. Modification of the isoprene emission model G93 for tropical tree Ficus virgata[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2008, 42(38), 8747-8754, 2008.
[92]	JARDINE A B, JARDINE K J, FUENTES J D, et al. Highly reactive light-dependent monoterpenes in the Amazon[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2015, 42(5): 1576-1583.
[93]	JARDINE K J, JARDINE A B, HOLM J A, et al. Monoterpene ‘thermometer’ of tropical forest-atmosphere response to climate warming[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2017, 40(3): 441-452.
[94]	MU Z, LLUSIÀ J, ZENG J, et al. An overview of the isoprenoid emissions from tropical plant species[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 833030.
[95]	BYRON J, KREUZWIESER J, PURSER G, et al. Chiral monoterpenes reveal forest emission mechanisms and drought responses[J]. Nature, 2022, 609(7926): 307-312.
[96]	TINGEY D T, MANNING M, GROTHAUS L C, et al. Influence of light and temperature on monoterpene emission rates from slash pine[J]. Plant Physiology, 1980, 65(5): 797-801. DOI PMID
[97]	ZENG J, SONG W, ZHANG Y, et al. Emissions of isoprenoids from dominant tree species in subtropical China[J]. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 2022, 5: 1089676.
[98]	SAKULYANONTVITTAYA T, DUHL T, WIEDINMYER C, et al. Monoterpene and sesquiterpene emission estimates for the United States[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42(5): 1623-1629.
[99]	WANG Y-F, OWEN S M, LI Q-J, et al. Monoterpene emissions from rubber trees (Hevea brasiliensis) in a changing landscape and climate: chemical speciation and environmental control[J]. Global Change Biology, 2007, 13(11): 2270-2282.
[100]	WILSKE B, CAO K F, SCHEBESKE G, et al. Isoprenoid emissions of trees in a tropical rainforest in Xishuangbanna, SW China[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2007, 41(18): 3748-3757.
[101]	SCHUH G, HEIDEN A C, HOFFMANN T, et al. Emissions of volatile organic compounds from sunflower and beech: dependence on temperature and light intensity[J]. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, 1997, 27(3): 291-318.
[102]	HELMIG D, ORTEGA J, GUENTHER A, et al. Sesquiterpene emissions from loblolly pine and their potential contribution to biogenic aerosol formation in the Southeastern US[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2006, 40(22), 4150-4157.
[103]	TARVAINEN V, HAKOLA H, HELLEN H, et al. Temperature and light dependence of the VOC emissions of Scots pine[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2005, 5(4): 989-998.
[104]	STAUDT M, BOURGEOIS I, AL HALABI R, et al. New insights into the parametrization of temperature and light responses of mono- and sesquiterpene emissions from Aleppo pine and rosemary[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2017, 152: 212-221.
[105]	NIINEMETS U, LORETO F, REICHSTEIN M. Physiological and physicochemical controls on foliar volatile organic compound emissions[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2004, 9(4): 180-186. PMID
[106]	OWEN S M, HARLEY P, GUENTHER A, et al. Light dependency of VOC emissions from selected Mediterranean plant species[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2002, 36(19): 3147-3159.
[107]	OTU-LARBI F, BOLAS C G, FERRACCI V, et al. Modelling the effect of the 2018 summer heatwave and drought on isoprene emissions in a UK woodland[J]. Global Change Biology, 2020, 26(4): 2320-2335.
[108]	FERRACCI V, BOLAS C G, FRESHWATER R A, et al. Continuous isoprene measurements in a UK temperate forest for a whole growing season: effects of drought stress during the 2018 heatwave[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47(15): e2020GL088885.
[109]	WANG H, WELCH A, NAGALINGAM S, et al. Arctic heatwaves could significantly influence the isoprene emissions from shrubs[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2024, 51(2): e2023GL107599.
[110]	WANG H, WELCH A M, NAGALINGAM S, et al. High temperature sensitivity of Arctic isoprene emissions explained by sedges[J]. Nature Communications, 2024, 15(1): 6144. DOI PMID
[111]	WANG H, NAGALINGAM S, WELCH A M, et al. Heat waves may trigger unexpected surge in aerosol and ozone precursor emissions from sedges in urban landscapes[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024, 121(45): e2412817121.
[112]	KIVIMAENPAA M, GHIMIRE R P, SUTINEN S, et al. Increases in volatile organic compound emissions of Scots pine in response to elevated ozone and warming are modified by herbivory and soil nitrogen availability[J]. European Journal of Forest Research, 2016, 135: 343-360.
[113]	PIKKARAINEN L, NISSINEN K, GHIMIRE R P, et al. Responses in growth and emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds in Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch seedlings to different warming treatments in a controlled field experiment[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 821: 153277.
[114]	TANG J, VALOLAHTI H, KIVIMAENPAA M, et al. Acclimation of biogenic volatile organic compound emission from subarctic heath under long-term moderate warming[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 2018, 123(1): 95-105.
[115]	LINDWALL F, SCHOLLERT M, MICHELSEN A, et al. Fourfold higher tundra volatile emissions due to arctic summer warming[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 2016, 121(3): 895-902.
[116]	WILKINSON M J, MONSON R K, TRAHAN N, et al. Leaf isoprene emission rate as a function of atmospheric CO₂ concentration[J]. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15(5): 1189-1200.
[117]	PEñUELAS J, STAUDT M. BVOCs and global change[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2010, 15(3): 133-144. DOI PMID
[118]	VUORINEN T, NERG A M, VAPAAVUORI E, et al. Emission of volatile organic compounds from two silver birch (Betula pendula Roth) clones grown under ambient and elevated CO₂ and different O₃ concentrations[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2005, 39(7): 1185-1197.
[119]	LORETO F, FISCHBACH R J, SCHNITZLER J P, et al. Monoterpene emission and monoterpene synthase activities in the Mediterranean evergreen oak Quercus ilex L. grown at elevated CO₂ concentrations[J]. Global Change Biology, 2001, 7(6): 709-717.
[120]	ARNETH A, NIINEMETS Ü, PRESSLEY S, et al. Process-based estimates of terrestrial ecosystem isoprene emissions: incorporating the effects of a direct CO₂-isoprene interaction[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2007, 7(1): 31-53.
[121]	PEÑUELAS J, LLUSIÀ J. BVOCs: plant defense against climate warming?[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2003, 8(3): 105-109. PMID
[122]	CALFAPIETRA C, MUGNOZZA G S, KARNOSKY D F, et al. Isoprene emission rates under elevated CO₂ and O₃ in two field-grown aspen clones differing in their sensitivity to O₃[J]. New Phytologist, 2008, 179(1): 55-61.
[123]	CALFAPIETRA C, WIBERLEY A E, FALBEL T G, et al. Isoprene synthase expression and protein levels are reduced under elevated O₃ but not under elevated CO₂ (FACE) in field-grown aspen trees[J]. Plant Cell and Environment, 2007, 30(5): 654-661.
[124]	LI T, TIIVA P, RINNAN A, et al. Long-term effects of elevated CO₂, nighttime warming and drought on plant secondary metabolites in a temperate heath ecosystem[J]. Annals of Botany, 2020, 125(7): 1065-1075. DOI PMID
[125]	SCHOLEFIELD P A, DOICK K J, HERBERT B M J, et al. Impact of rising CO₂ on emissions of volatile organic compounds: isoprene emission from Phragmites australis growing at elevated CO₂ in a natural carbon dioxide spring[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2004, 27(4): 393-401.
[126]	DARBAH J N, SHARKEY T D, CALFAPIETRA C, et al. Differential response of aspen and birch trees to heat stress under elevated carbon dioxide[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2010, 158(4): 1008-1014. DOI PMID
[127]	MONSON R K, TRAHAN N, ROSENSTIEL T N, et al. Isoprene emission from terrestrial ecosystems in response to global change: minding the gap between models and observations[J]. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society A: Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2007, 365(1856): 1677-1695.
[128]	POSSELL M, HEWITT C N. Isoprene emissions from plants are mediated by atmospheric CO₂ concentrations[J]. Global Change Biology, 2011, 17(4): 1595-1610.
[129]	POSSELL M, HEWITT C N, BEERLING D J. The effects of glacial atmospheric CO₂ concentrations and climate on isoprene emissions by vascular plants[J]. Global Change Biology, 2005, 11(1): 60-69.
[130]	RAPPARINI F, BARALDI R, MIGLIETTA F, et al. Isoprenoid emission in trees of Quercus pubescens and Quercus ilex with lifetime exposure to naturally high CO₂ environment[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2004, 27(4): 381-391.
[131]	VURRO E, BRUNI R, BIANCHI A, et al. Elevated atmospheric CO₂ decreases oxidative stress and increases essential oil yield in leaves of Thymus vulgaris grown in a mini-FACE system[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2009, 65(1): 99-106.
[132]	MOCHIZUKI T, WATANABE M, KOIKE T, et al. Monoterpene emissions from needles of hybrid larch F1 (Larix gmelinii var. japonica × Larix kaempferi) grown under elevated carbon dioxide and ozone[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2017, 148: 197-202.
[133]	GUIDOLOTTI G, CALFAPIETRA C, LORETO F. The relationship between isoprene emission, CO₂ assimilation and water use efficiency across a range of poplar genotypes[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2011, 142(3): 297-304.
[134]	RASULOV B, HUEVE K, VAELBE M, et al. Evidence that light, carbon dioxide, and oxygen dependencies of leaf isoprene emission are driven by energy status in hybrid aspen[J]. Plant Physiology, 2009, 151(1): 448-460. DOI PMID
[135]	TIIVA P, TANG J, MICHELSEN A, et al. Monoterpene emissions in response to long-term night-time warming, elevated CO₂ and extended summer drought in a temperate heath ecosystem[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 580: 1056-1067.
[136]	SUN Z, NIINEMETS Ü, HÜVE K, et al. Enhanced isoprene emission capacity and altered light responsiveness in aspen grown under elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentration[J]. Global Change Biology, 2012, 18(11): 3423-3440.
[137]	SUN Z, NIINEMETS Ü, HUEVE K, et al. Elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentration leads to increased whole-plant isoprene emission in hybrid aspen (Populus tremula × Populus tremuloides)[J]. New Phytologist, 2013, 198(3): 788-800.
[138]	AUSTEN N, WALKER H J, LAKE J A, et al. The regulation of plant secondary metabolism in response to abiotic stress: interactions between heat shock and elevated CO₂[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2019, 10: 1463. DOI PMID
[139]	POTOSNAK M J, LESTOURGEON L, NUNEZ O. Increasing leaf temperature reduces the suppression of isoprene emission by elevated CO₂ concentration[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2014, 481: 352-359.
[140]	STAUDT M, DAUSSY J, INGABIRE J, et al. Growth and actual leaf temperature modulate CO₂ responsiveness of monoterpene emissions from holm oak in opposite ways[J]. Biogeosciences, 2022, 19(20): 4945-4963.
[141]	LANTZ A T, ALLMAN J, WERADUWAGE S M, et al. Isoprene: new insights into the control of emission and mediation of stress tolerance by gene expression[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2019, 42(10): 2808-2826.
[142]	LANTZ A T, SOLOMON C, GOG L, et al. Isoprene suppression by CO₂ is not due to triose phosphate utilization (TPU) limitation[J]. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 2019, 2: 8.
[143]	YANG W, CAO J, WU Y, et al. Review on plant terpenoid emissions worldwide and in China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 787: 147454.
[144]	ROSENSTIEL T N, POTOSNAK M J, GRIFFIN K L, et al. Increased CO₂ uncouples growth from isoprene emission in an agriforest ecosystem[J]. Nature, 2003, 421(6920): 256-259.
[145]	AFFEK H P, YAKIR D. Protection by isoprene against singlet oxygen in leaves[J]. Plant Physiology, 2002, 129(1): 269-277. PMID
[146]	MONSON R K, NEICE A A, TRAHAN N A, et al. Interactions between temperature and intercellular CO₂ concentration in controlling leaf isoprene emission rates[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2016, 39(11): 2404-2413.
[147]	NIINEMETS Ü, RASULOV B, TALTS E. CO₂-responsiveness of leaf isoprene emission: why do species differ?[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2021, 44(9): 3049-3063.
[148]	SAHU A, MOSTOFA M G, WERADUWAGE S M, et al. Hydroxymethylbutenyl diphosphate accumulation reveals MEP pathway regulation for high CO₂-induced suppression of isoprene emission[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023, 120(41): e2309536120.
[149]	GALLOWAY J N, DENTENER F J, CAPONE D G, et al. Nitrogen cycles: past, present, and future[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2004, 70: 153-226.
[150]	LIN Q, ZHU J, WANG Q, et al. Patterns and drivers of atmospheric nitrogen deposition retention in global forests[J]. Global Change Biology, 2024, 30(7): e17410.
[151]	MAO J, XING Y, MA H, et al. Research progress of nitrogen deposition effect on plant growth[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(29): 42-48. DOI
[152]	LEBAUER D S, TRESEDER K K. Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed[J]. Ecology, 2008, 89(2): 371-379. PMID
[153]	ELSER J J, FAGAN W F, KERKHOFF A J, et al. Biological stoichiometry of plant production: metabolism, scaling and ecological response to global change[J]. New Phytologist, 2010, 186(3): 593-608. DOI PMID
[154]	LAOTHAWORNKITKUL J, TAYLOR J E, PAUL N D, et al. Biogenic volatile organic compounds in the Earth system[J]. New Phytologist, 2009, 183(1): 27-51. DOI PMID
[155]	LITVAK M E, LORETO F, HARLEY P C, et al. The response of isoprene emission rate and photosynthetic rate to photon flux and nitrogen supply in aspen and white oak trees[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 1996, 19(5): 549-559.
[156]	YUAN X, FENG Z, SHANG B, et al. Ozone exposure, nitrogen addition and moderate drought dynamically interact to affect isoprene emission in poplar[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 734: 139368.
[157]	SHARKEY T D, WIBERLEY A E, DONOHUE A R. Isoprene emission from plants: why and how[J]. Annals of Botany, 2008, 101(1): 5-18. DOI PMID
[158]	LLUSIA J, BERMEJO-BERMEJO V, CALVETE-SOGO H, et al. Decreased rates of terpene emissions in Ornithopus compressus L. and Trifolium striatum L. by ozone exposure and nitrogen fertilization[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2014, 194: 69-77.
[159]	HUANG X, LAI J, LIU Y, et al. Biogenic volatile organic compound emissions from Pinus massoniana and Schima superba seedlings: their responses to foliar and soil application of nitrogen[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 705: 135761.
[160]	BRYANT J P, CHAPIN F S, KLEIN D R. Carbon/nutrient balance of boreal plants in relation to vertebrate herbivory[J]. Oikos, 1983, 40: 357-368.
[161]	NUNES-NESI A, FERNIE A R, STITT M. Metabolic and signaling aspects underpinning the regulation of plant carbon nitrogen interactions[J]. Molecular Plant, 2010, 3(6): 973-996.
[162]	NAGEGOWDA D A. Plant volatile terpenoid metabolism: biosynthetic genes, transcriptional regulation and subcellular compartmentation[J]. FEBS Letters, 2010, 584(14): 2965-2973. DOI PMID
[163]	CAMPOS F G, VIEIRA M A R, AMARO A C E, et al. Nitrogen in the defense system of Annona emarginata (Schltdl.) H. Rainer[J]. Plos One, 2019, 14(6): e0217930.
[164]	NEILL S, BARROS R, BRIGHT J, et al. Nitric oxide, stomatal closure, and abiotic stress[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2008, 59(2): 165-176. DOI PMID
[165]	ROSALES E P, IANNONE M F, GROPPA M D, et al. Nitric oxide inhibits nitrate reductase activity in wheat leaves[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2011, 49(2): 124-130. DOI PMID
[166]	MANNINEN A M, UTRIAINEN J, HOLOPAINEN T, et al. Terpenoids in the wood of Scots pine and Norway spruce seedlings exposed to ozone at different nitrogen availability[J]. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2002, 32(12): 2140-2145.
[167]	SINGH A, SINGH R, MINA U, et al. Effects of different doses of nitrogen treatments on isoprene emission from Ficus glomerata[J]. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 2010, 2(1): 13-16.
[168]	ODAK J A, OWUOR P O, MANG’URO L O A, et al. Influence of nitrogen fertilisation on red spider mites (Oligonychus coffeae Nietner) and overhead volatile organic compounds in tea (Camellia sinensis)[J]. International Journal of Tea Science, 2017, 13(1/2): 52-59.
[169]	YUAN X, SHANG B, XU Y, et al. No significant interactions between nitrogen stimulation and ozone inhibition of isoprene emission in Cathay poplar[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 601: 222-229.
[170]	俞飞. 模拟氮沉降对雌雄美洲黑杨光合特性和异戊二烯释放的影响[J]. 林业科技通讯, 2018(5): 3-6.
[171]	HU B, JAROSCH A-M, GAUDER M, et al. VOC emissions and carbon balance of two bioenergy plantations in response to nitrogen fertilization: a comparison of Miscanthus and Salix[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2018, 237: 205-217.
[172]	PäIVI T, ELINA H, ANNE K. Impact of warming, moderate nitrogen addition and bark herbivory on BVOC emissions and growth of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings[J]. Tree Physiology, 2018, 38(10): 1461-1475.
[173]	MU Z, LLUSIA J, LIU D, et al. Profile of foliar isoprenoid emissions from Mediterranean dominant shrub and tree species under experimental nitrogen deposition[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2019, 216: 116951.
[174]	HOSHIKA Y, BRILLI F, BARALDI R, et al. Ozone impairs the response of isoprene emission to foliar nitrogen and phosphorus in poplar[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2020, 267: 115679.
[175]	Y.C. D, J.B. Y, H.A. G, et al. Volatile organic compound profiling of Capsicum annuum var. longum grown under different concentrations of nitrogen[J]. Hellenic Plant Protection Journal, 2021, 14: 77-88.
[176]	MA H, WU Q, FU Y, et al. Short-term response of BVOCs emissions from several dominant tropical rainforest tree species in Hainan Island to simulated nitrogen deposition[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2023, 43(3): 1073-1089.
[177]	YANG W, ZHANG B, WU Y, et al. Effects of soil drought and nitrogen deposition on BVOC emissions and their O₃ and SOA formation for Pinus thunbergii[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2023, 316: 120693.
[178]	LIU S, GONG D, WANG Y, et al. Responses of plant volatile emissions to increasing nitrogen deposition: a pilot study on Eucalyptus urophylla[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 952: 175887.
[179]	SONG X, HE H, XIE X, et al. Effects of simulated nitrogen deposition on BVOCs emission dynamics and O₃ and SOA production potentials in seedlings of three Ficus species[J]. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 2024, 15(9): 102202.
[180]	HOULE D, MARTY C, DUCHESNE L. Response of canopy nitrogen uptake to a rapid decrease in bulk nitrate deposition in two eastern Canadian boreal forests[J]. Oecologia, 2015, 177: 29-37. DOI PMID
[181]	GAIGE E, DAIL D B, HOLLINGER D Y, et al. Changes in canopy processes following whole-forest canopy nitrogen fertilization of a mature spruce-hemlock forest[J]. Ecosystems, 2007, 10: 1133-1147.
[182]	ORMEñO E, GOLDSTEIN A, NIINEMETS Ü. Extracting and trapping biogenic volatile organic compounds stored in plant species[J]. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2011, 30(7): 978-989.
[183]	BRUMME R, LEIMCKE U, MATZNER E. Interception and uptake of NH₄ and NO₃ from wet deposition by above-ground parts of young beech (Fagus silvatica L.) trees[J]. Plant and Soil, 1992, 142: 273-279.
[184]	HOBBIE E A, WERNER R A. Intramolecular, compound-specific, and bulk carbon isotope patterns in C₃ and C₄ plants: a review and synthesis[J]. New Phytologist, 2004, 161(2): 371-385.
[185]	COUSINS A B, BLOOM A J. Oxygen consumption during leaf nitrate assimilation in a C₃ and C₄ plant: the role of mitochondrial respiration[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2004, 27(12): 1537-1545.
[186]	BOND W J. The tortoise and the hare: ecology of angiosperm dominance and gymnosperm persistence[J]. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 1989, 36(3): 227-249.
[187]	CARSLAW K, BOUCHER O, SPRACKLEN D, et al. A review of natural aerosol interactions and feedbacks within the Earth system[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2010, 10(4): 1701-1737.
[188]	KOOPERMAN G J, PRITCHARD M S, GHAN S J, et al. Constraining the influence of natural variability to improve estimates of global aerosol indirect effects in a nudged version of the community atmosphere model 5[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2012, 117(D23): D23204.
[189]	SPORRE M K, BLICHNER S M, KARSET I H, et al. BVOC-aerosol-climate feedbacks investigated using NorESM[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2019, 19(7): 4763-4782. DOI
[190]	RODERICK M L, FARQUHAR G D, BERRY S L, et al. On the direct effect of clouds and atmospheric particles on the productivity and structure of vegetation[J]. Oecologia, 2001, 129: 21-30. DOI PMID
[191]	MENTEL T F, KLEIST E, ANDRES S, et al. Secondary aerosol formation from stress-induced biogenic emissions and possible climate feedbacks[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2013, 13(17): 8755-8770.
[192]	MAKKONEN R, ASMI A, KERMINEN V M, et al. BVOC-aerosol-climate interactions in the global aerosol-climate model ECHAM5.5-HAM2[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2012, 12(21): 10077-10096.
[193]	冯兆忠, 袁相洋. 臭氧浓度升高对植物源挥发性有机化合物(BVOCs)影响的研究进展[J]. 环境科学, 2018, 39(11): 5257-5265.
[194]	AGATHOKLEOUS E, FENG Z, OKSANEN E, et al. Ozone affects plant, insect, and soil microbial communities: a threat to terrestrial ecosystems and biodiversity[J]. Science Advances, 2020, 6(33): eabc1176.
[195]	LLUSIA J, PENUELAS J, GIMENO B. Seasonal and species-specific response of VOC emissions by Mediterranean woody plant to elevated ozone concentrations[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2002, 36(24): 3931-3938.
[196]	NIINEMETS Ü, MONSON R K. Biology, controls and models of tree volatile organic compound emissions[M]. Dordrecht: Springer, 2013.
[197]	WITTIG V E, AINSWORTH E A, NAIDU S L, et al. Quantifying the impact of current and future tropospheric ozone on tree biomass, growth, physiology and biochemistry: a quantitative meta-analysis[J]. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15(2): 396-424.
[198]	WILKINSON S, DAVIES W J. Drought, ozone, ABA and ethylene: new insights from cell to plant to community[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2010, 33(4): 510-525.
[199]	BEHNKE K, KLEIST E, UERLINGS R, et al. RNAi-mediated suppression of isoprene biosynthesis in hybrid poplar impacts ozone tolerance[J]. Tree Physiology, 2009, 29(5): 725-736. DOI PMID

方法	适用尺度	优势	局限性
静态法^[51]	叶片、枝条、小植株	装置简易便携,适用于未知植物排放谱的检测,测量地形受限性较低	测装置内-外内外环境条件差异大,生理扰动严重,低挥发性MT/SQT等损失严重,且无法直接测量冠层排放,不适合排放速率的准确测量
动态叶室法^[18,52]	叶片	能够控制环境变量,开展单一变量的控制实验,测量地形受限性较低	低排放树种测量难度较大,低挥发性BVOCs特别是SQT损失严重,且无法直接测量冠层排放
动态箱法^[53-54]	叶片、枝条、小植株	开展短-长期真实排放测量,在活性MT/SQT测量方面具有优势	设备架设难度较高,测量地形受限性较高,无法直接测量冠层排放
塔基驰豫涡旋积累法^[59]	冠层	能够反映几百至几千米范围下垫面的综合排放特征;结合离线吸附管采样手段,能够区分到单个BVOCs化合物	测量地形受限性较高,只能借助生态通量塔开展研究,离线采样较麻烦,操作难度大,高活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
塔基涡度协方差法^[57]	冠层	能够反映几百至几千米范围下垫面的综合排放特征;结合高频在线分析手段,能够进行长期排放测量	受测量地形影响大,需高频分析仪器(>10 Hz),目前常用的PTR-ToF-MS不能区分同分异构体;高活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
机载涡度协方差法^[58]	区域	能够反映区域尺度下垫面的综合排放特征;测量不受地形限制	测量设备较昂贵;常用的PTR-ToF-MS不能区分同分异构体;活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
无人机^[56]	冠层/区域	能够反映冠层/区域尺度下垫面的综合排放特征;测量不受地形限制;结合离线吸附管采样能够区分到单个BVOCs化合物	测量过程中局部湍流扰动较大,无法长时间测量,无法高精度检测高反应活性的MT/SQT

方法	适用尺度	优势	局限性
静态法^[51]	叶片、枝条、小植株	装置简易便携,适用于未知植物排放谱的检测,测量地形受限性较低	测装置内-外内外环境条件差异大,生理扰动严重,低挥发性MT/SQT等损失严重,且无法直接测量冠层排放,不适合排放速率的准确测量
动态叶室法^[18,52]	叶片	能够控制环境变量,开展单一变量的控制实验,测量地形受限性较低	低排放树种测量难度较大,低挥发性BVOCs特别是SQT损失严重,且无法直接测量冠层排放
动态箱法^[53-54]	叶片、枝条、小植株	开展短-长期真实排放测量,在活性MT/SQT测量方面具有优势	设备架设难度较高,测量地形受限性较高,无法直接测量冠层排放
塔基驰豫涡旋积累法^[59]	冠层	能够反映几百至几千米范围下垫面的综合排放特征;结合离线吸附管采样手段,能够区分到单个BVOCs化合物	测量地形受限性较高,只能借助生态通量塔开展研究,离线采样较麻烦,操作难度大,高活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
塔基涡度协方差法^[57]	冠层	能够反映几百至几千米范围下垫面的综合排放特征;结合高频在线分析手段,能够进行长期排放测量	受测量地形影响大,需高频分析仪器(>10 Hz),目前常用的PTR-ToF-MS不能区分同分异构体;高活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
机载涡度协方差法^[58]	区域	能够反映区域尺度下垫面的综合排放特征;测量不受地形限制	测量设备较昂贵;常用的PTR-ToF-MS不能区分同分异构体;活性MT/SQT测量不确定性大
无人机^[56]	冠层/区域	能够反映冠层/区域尺度下垫面的综合排放特征;测量不受地形限制;结合离线吸附管采样能够区分到单个BVOCs化合物	测量过程中局部湍流扰动较大,无法长时间测量,无法高精度检测高反应活性的MT/SQT

实验方法	OTC	FACE系统	便携式光合仪
测量尺度	树种尺度	区域尺度	叶片尺度
CO₂控制	不能持续控制,波动范围大	波动范围大,固定浓度控制	精准控制,误差很小
叶室和供气	底部或中部供气,顶部有开口	完全开放式,由自带的扩散系统供气	叶室完全密闭,CO₂气瓶供气
流速	一般10 L·min^-1以上	流速等于空气流速	0~2 L·min^-1
BVOC采集	动态箱、静态箱	动态箱、静态箱	动态箱
适用情况	固定浓度长期熏蒸,并且保持较稳定的环境状态	固定浓度长期熏蒸,只控制CO₂浓度	快速CO₂响应测量
局限性	受外界条件影响很大	无法控制除了CO₂之外的环境参数	体积太小,一般情况下只能测量异戊二烯

实验方法	OTC	FACE系统	便携式光合仪
测量尺度	树种尺度	区域尺度	叶片尺度
CO₂控制	不能持续控制,波动范围大	波动范围大,固定浓度控制	精准控制,误差很小
叶室和供气	底部或中部供气,顶部有开口	完全开放式,由自带的扩散系统供气	叶室完全密闭,CO₂气瓶供气
流速	一般10 L·min^-1以上	流速等于空气流速	0~2 L·min^-1
BVOC采集	动态箱、静态箱	动态箱、静态箱	动态箱
适用情况	固定浓度长期熏蒸,并且保持较稳定的环境状态	固定浓度长期熏蒸,只控制CO₂浓度	快速CO₂响应测量
局限性	受外界条件影响很大	无法控制除了CO₂之外的环境参数	体积太小,一般情况下只能测量异戊二烯