Holbrook and Zwieniecki reply: Terry Goldman is correct in suggesting that providing plants with higher carbon dioxide concentrations can result in both water conservation and enhanced photosynthesis. Indeed, CO2 fertilization is already used by many commercial growers. However, enclosed growing systems have huge energy costs associated with cooling and are thus unsuited for large-scale agricultural production.On the planetary scale, we are currently conducting such an experiment, albeit in an uncontrolled fashion. Increased atmospheric CO2 due to human activities such as fossil-fuel combustion and land clearing is estimated to have increased terrestrial photosynthetic output. However, at the same time, rising temperatures due to higher greenhouse gas concentrations increase the water demands placed on plants and are predicted to alter the frequency and intensity of precipitation events. Thus, although elevated CO2 can improve the efficiency of photosynthesis, there appears to be no free lunch.Jean Roy’s letter suggests that our Quick Study on water transport in trees should “teach the controversy,” so to speak. However, there is no scientific controversy regarding the cohesion-tension theory of water transport in plants. In the early 1990s, there was a short-term challenge to the theory due to discrepancies observed by Ulrich Zimmermann using a pressure probe. Subsequent refinements of that measurement technique by Zimmermann and others eliminated those concerns. 1 1. P. J. Melcher, F. C. Meinzer, D. E. Yount, G. Goldstein, U. Zimmermann, J. Exp. Bot. 49, 1757 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/49.327.1757 Since then no xylem water transport data have been found to be inconsistent with the cohesion-tension theory. Nor has any alternative mechanism been proposed that can explain the transport of water in plants. Publication of the reference Roy cites prompted 45 prominent plant biologists to protest. 2 2. G. Angeles et al. , New Phytol. 163, 451 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01142.x The editor’s response was that the paper by Zimmermann and coauthors should be perceived as representing the “views and opinions” of the authors and not as a review of the current state of knowledge appropriate for newcomers to the field. 3 3. I. Woodward, New Phytol. 163, 453 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01141.x Finally, we stand by our citation of W. F. Pickard’s 1981 work as an outstanding treatment of water transport in plants. That paper is particularly appropriate for the readers of Physics Today because it assumes high literacy in the physical sciences rather than detailed knowledge of plant anatomy. REFERENCESSection:ChooseTop of pageREFERENCES <<1. P. J. Melcher, F. C. Meinzer, D. E. Yount, G. Goldstein, U. Zimmermann, J. Exp. Bot. 49, 1757 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/49.327.1757 , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS2. G. Angeles et al. , New Phytol. 163, 451 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01142.x , Google ScholarCrossref3. I. Woodward, New Phytol. 163, 453 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01141.x , Google ScholarCrossref© 2008 American Institute of Physics.