Sentences with phrase «less photosynthesis»

gases in the atmosphere → less light → less photosynthesis → less vegetation growth → less water retention → more drought and floods → less biomass → the earth becomes a cold desert

8 GHG Sources Combustion of fossil fuels Deforestation (loss of sink)-- Slash and burn techniques release CO 2 — Fewer trees, less photosynthesis Fertilizers CFCs Methane

Less photosynthesis, in turn, meant less oxygen released into the ocean.

«There may be less photosynthesis in the wet season because of the cloud cover which limits the amount of light the plants can use.»

Not exact matches

The simulations suggested that the indirect effects of increased CO2 on net primary productivity (how much carbon dioxide vegetation takes in during photosynthesis minus how much carbon dioxide the plants release during respiration) are large and variable, ranging from less than 10 per cent to more than 100 per cent of the size of direct effects.

To address this concern, engineering CAM photosynthesis into food and energy crops could reduce agricultural water use and boost crops» resilience when the water supply is less than desirable.

The researchers were surprised to learn that this speeding - up of carbon uptake during periods of slower warming was due mainly to less respiration from plants and not to greater photosynthesis.

«Marine ecosystems everywhere to the north will be increasingly starved for nutrients, leading to less primary production (photosynthesis) by phytoplankton, which form the base of ocean food chains.»

Engineered plants conserve 25 percent more water by only partially opening their mouth - like stomata, allowing less water to escape through transpiration while carbon dioxide enters the plant to fuel photosynthesis.

As oxygen increased in Earth's atmosphere and organisms became more complex, different forms of metabolism evolved, from plants» photosynthesis to the lesser - known chemolithotrophy.

Her efforts allowed her to discover that single - cell plants that were exposed to aldehydes did end up with less chlorophyll — the green pigment in plants that absorbs light and plays a key role in photosynthesis.

Though the disc shape makes the leaf less efficient at photosynthesis, Simon says that the benefits of attracting bats outweigh this energetic cost: bats are good pollinators, and their large home range means they can take pollen to plants far apart from each other, and so help their reproduction, he says.

Overturning textbook knowledge, the researchers discovered that the trees «exhale» less carbon dioxide during the day than previously thought, and that forest photosynthesis doesn't decline over the course of the summer.

The discussions might feel less productive than, say, collaboratively designing lessons on geometry, photosynthesis, or textual analysis.

The transition from deeply rooted energy systems based on burning fossil fuels to new norms emitting ever less of this gas — here and in China — is seen by many as requiring a sustained energy quest including much greater direct government investment on the frontiers of relevant technologies (batteries, photovoltaics, superconductivity, photosynthesis).]

Allowing for that falling on the oceans, and further decline due to angle of incidence as distance from equator increases, less the amount required by vegetation for photosynthesis, we are left with how much energy for conversion of solar radiation to heat / electricity / catalytic reaction to other fuels?

Compared to forests, croplands are less efficient in transpiration, a daytime process where water evaporates from leaves during photosynthesis and cools the air.

... Sagebrush, by comparison [with the flowers], is less active at photosynthesis and it produces far less plant material each year.

Even though such transitory influences as day and night or seasonal variations in photosynthesis cause clearly visible swings in the curve, the 30 percent drop between 1929 and 1932 caused not a ripple: empirical scientific evidence that the human contribution is in fact less than a fart in a hurricane, as Dr. Hertzberg says.

And as to his claim that there may be «places around the world where global warming will lead to less crop success and yield, even when taking into account the carbon dioxide fertilization effect,» he appears to be equally ignorant that rising levels of atmospheric CO2 tend to raise the temperature of optimum plant photosynthesis beyond the predicted temperature values associated with global warming, effectively nullifying this worn out claim (Idso & Idso, 2011).

Plants response to higher CO2 levels result in less water utilation for photosynthesis (esp C4) which results in large gains of leaf growth (more growth for same water)-- forcing evapotranspiration to increase.

The intruding warm and nutrient - rich currents also cause less ice, which promotes more photosynthesis.

This plant approach seems to have some resonance with many people since it seems easy to understand that less CO2, essential for photosynthesis, means less plant growth and thus less food for animals including humans.

For me, that means I'd like to see it broken down, which Coby has done well so far, by (these are just examples i'd like to see): Factors and evidence supporting or effectively debunking a) ocean acidity, which in itself has produced a number of alarming effects including less saline density in turn causing a slowing of thermohaline circulation (such as the gulf stream) b) photosynthesis - carbon sinks vs. sources or any direction that you'd like to take using what science knows CO2 to have an effect on.

With less light penetrating the ocean surface, marine plants — otherwise known as primary producers — may be less able to carry out photosynthesis.

Less ice cover leads to more solar heating throughout the Arctic Ocean, and ocean photosynthesis increases as more light penetrates into the water, ultimately resulting in «changes at the base of the ocean food chain,» according to the video.

you may observe that at around 400 ppmv, the net rate of photosynthesis in ideal greenhouse conditions begins to gain much less per additional unit of CO2; we've already hit the point of diminishing returns and by Liebig's Law of the Minimum can say with some confidence that experiments could find that additional CO2 on plants in the wild may be net detrimental right now.

I would have thought this would be more significant than the much less frequent reactions occuring during photosynthesis, especially in oceanic environments.

The Brazilian portion of the Amazon comprises 4 × 106 km2, 12 less than 1 percent of global land area, but disproportionally important in terms of aboveground terrestrial biomass (15 percent of global terrestrial photosynthesis [Field et al., 1998]-RRB- and number of species (~ 25 percent, Dirzo and Raven, 2003).

C (or methane hydrates / clathrates, in case that isn't considered geologic)-RRB-, Halting all marine photosynthesis and letting respiration / decay continue at the same rate (it would actually decay over time as less organic C would be available) would result in an O2 decrease at a rate of about 0.011 % per year, but it could only fall at that rate for about 3 weeks, with a total O2 decrease of about 0.000675 % (relative to total O2, and not counting organic C burial, which wouldn't make a big difference); Halting all land photosynthesis and letting respirationd / decay proceed at the same rate would cause O2 to fall about 0.027 % per year for about 19 years, with a total drop of about 0.52 %.

The seeds would be designed to stimulate greater photosynthesis, improve root structures, and enhance other characteristics so the transgenic corn can yield more kernels with less water.

You said, «Halting all marine photosynthesis and letting respiration / decay continue at the same rate (it would actually decay over time as less organic C would be available) would result in an O2 decrease at a rate of about 0.011 % per year, but it could only fall at that rate for about 3 weeks, with a total O2 decrease of about 0.000675 %»

There's about 0.7 KW available per square meter of land at 45 degrees latitude (at noon, much less at sunrise & sunset), photosynthesis is less than 10 % efficient.

The basis of the new technology is a genetically - modified algae that carries mutations that lower the amount of electric charge released nonproductively during photosynthesis, so less was going to waste.

When photosynthesis is reduced for any reason the plant will re-allocate even less of its carbon to defensive compounds.

While it shares a similar growing season, switchgrass is much less efficient at photosynthesis; Miscanthus has a conversion efficiency of around 1 % (1 % of sunlight gets turned into biomass).

However, much less than 30 % of that reaches the surface and is available for surface heating because of scattering and absorption by the atmosphere and scattering by clouds; it is probably even lower for the oceans because of equatorial cloudiness and plankton using light for photosynthesis instead of it resulting in heating of the water.

The result we can observe is that plants grow faster and are bigger, that they are more resistant to diseases and to destructive insects, and that their photosynthesis is way more efficient and that they, therefore, consume less water.

It's also, apparently, a genetically - interesting crop, and scientists have unlocked the secret to its super efficient form of photosynthesis that uses considerably less water and allows it to grow on less - than - hospitable land.