Abstract

The monoterpene composition (emission and tissue internal concentration) of major forest tree species in the United States is discussed. Of the 14 most commonly occurring compounds ( α-pinene, β-pinene, Δ 3-carene, d-limonene, camphene, myrcene, α-terpinene, β-phellandrene, sabinene, ρ-cymene, ocimene, α-thujene, terpinolene, and γ-terpinene), the first six are usually found to be most abundant. Expected regional variability based on the monoterpene composition fingerprints and corresponding tree species distribution and abundance is examined. In the southeast, α-pinene and β-pinene seem to dominate monoterpene emissions, while in the northern forests emissions are distributed more evenly among the six major compounds. In some parts of western forests, β-pinene and Δ 3-carene can be more abundant than α-pinene. Among the other eight compounds, β-phellandrene and sabinene occasionally are significant percentages of expected local monoterpene emissions. Ocimene and ρ-cymene are estimated to be more common in regions dominated by deciduous broadleaf forests, although total emission rates are generally lower for these forests relative to those dominated by conifers. These percentages are compared with monoterpene composition measured in ambient air at various sites. Estimated monoterpene emission composition based on local forest species composition agrees fairly well with ambient measurements for the six major compounds. The past assumption that α-pinene composes approximately 50% of total monoterpene emissions appears reasonable for many areas, except for possibly the northern coniferous forests and some areas in the west dominated by true firs, spruce, and western pines (lodgepole and ponderosa pines). The oxygenated monoterpenes such as camphor, bornyl acetate, and cineole often compose high percentages of the monoterpenes within plant tissues, but are much less abundant in emission samples. Even after adjusting for lower vapor pressures of these compounds, emission rates relative to the hydrocarbon monoterpenes are often lower than would be expected from their internal concentrations. More study is warranted on monoterpene emission rates and composition, especially from the spruces, true firs, hemlocks, cedars, and some deciduous species such as the maples. Non-invasive canopy level and whole ecosystem flux studies are also needed to establish uncertainty estimates for monoterpene emission models.

Highlights

  • Much of the recent work on emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) has focused on isoprene

  • Individual monoterpenes are usually identi"ed in these essential oils by the traditional techniques of physical constants, elemental analysis, solubility, chemical reaction tests and spectral data [mass spectroscopy, infrared absorption, and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy] of the isolated compound

  • Most essential oils extracted from plants are analyzed by combined gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and sometimes gas chromatography-Fourier transform infrared (IR) spectroscopy

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Much of the recent work on emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) has focused on isoprene. Monoterpenes with exocyclic double bonds, such as -pinene and sabinene, tend to form more aerosols following ozonolysis compared to those with endocyclic double bonds, such as -pinene and -carene (Hatakeyama et al., 1989) Those with two double bonds can react to produce even higher aerosol yields, depending on the vapor pressure of the reaction products. We examine monoterpene composition (MC) of plant and foliage enclosure emission samples, leaf oil, and extracts from woody and cortical tissues previously reported to identify patterns among dominant tree species and geographic regions in the USA. We suggest that these data be used to help speciate the monoterpene emissions estimated from future versions of Biogenic. Emissions Inventory Systems (for example BEIS2, Geron et al, 1994) to support future North American tropospheric ozone and aerosol modeling e!orts

Background
Approach
Monoterpene composition analysis of US tree species
Regional monoterpene emission distribution
Comparison of estimates with ambient measurements

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.