DOE OSTI2023
The first research on the possibilities offered by chlorophyll-a fluorescence to track the daily course of CO 2 assimilation by leaves dates back to the last century (Kautsky and Hirsch, 1931). In the second half of the XXth Century, the development of the field of active fluorescence, which relies mainly on the pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) fluorimetry technique, allowed the unraveling of the relationship between the yield of chlorophyll-a fluorescence and photochemistry (linear electron transport), which is modulated by a third process known as non-photochemical quenching (Genty et al., 1989). Since then, active fluorescence has been regularly used in ecophysiology, forestry, and crop sciences to understand the plant response to stress (Schreiber, 2004). Since the beginning of the 2000s, the development of portable field spectrometers allows for measuring passive sun-induced fluorescence (SIF) at strong solar or telluric absorption features, which do not rely on the use of artificial excitation light (e.g., Meroni and Colombo, 2006; Meroni et al., 2009; Perez-Priego et al., 2005). Since then, the field has rapidly evolved, and now fluorescence is measurable with automated field spectrometers in the field (Grossmann et al., 2018; Gu et al., 2019b; Rossini et al., 2010), airborne platforms (Rascher et al., 2015; Zarco-Tejada et al., 2000), and satellites (Guanter et al., 2012; Sun et al., 2018). These advances offer the potential to couple ecosystem-scale measurements of CO 2 fluxes and SIF to probe new aspects related to ecosystem structural impacts on SIF andphotosynthesis processes at different time-scales and on different ecosystems (e.g., Damm et al., 2010; Magney et al., 2019; Porcar-Castell et al., 2021). While SIF has been proven as a good proxy of gross primary productivity (GPP), mainly across large spatial and temporal gradients, a series of studies showed that different factors could confound this relationship, namely different canopy structures (e.g., Dechant et al., 2020; Migliavacca et al., 2017), stress conditions (e.g., Martini et al., 2022; Wieneke et al., 2018; Wohlfahrt et al., 2018), nutritional conditions (Cendrero-Mateo et al., 2015; Martini et al., 2019), species-specific differences (e.g., Van Wittenberghe et al., 2013) and light regimes (e.g., Liu and Liu, 2018). At the same time, the modeling of SIF developed rapidly (Gu et al., 2019a; Han et al., 2022; Han et al., 2021; van der Tol et al., 2014; van der Tol et al., 2009) and with an increasing degree of realism, offering the possibility to retrieve important vegetation parameters from remote sensing (Pacheco-Labrador et al., 2019; Verrelst et al., 2015; Verrelst et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2014). Excellent and comprehensive reviews of the field are by (Mohammed et al., 2019; Porcar-Castell et al., 2021; Porcar-Castell et al., 2014; Sun et al., 2023a; Sun et al., 2023b). Despite the exponential increase in the number of publications in the field, significant progress is still needed. Here, this special issue aims to report foundational SIF science, including theoretical modeling and measurement-based research that is urgently needed to unleash the full potential of SIF for physiological and ecological applications at scales spanning from leaf to globe. The 14 articles collected in this special issue reported on the following specific aspects: first, technical capabilities enabling spectrally resolved SIF observations and their inter-comparability in space and time; second, theoretical developments in SIF-photosynthesis relationships to correctly interpret the signal and extract mechanistic information on vegetation structure and function; third, evaluation of the potential of SIF to track process beyond photosynthesis, such as transpiration; fourth, large scale-applications of SIF observations; and finally, upscaling fluorescence from leaf to canopy scales.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗