Ainsworth, E. A., and Long, S. P. (2005). What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytical review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytologist, 165, 351–372.Google Scholar

Ainsworth, E. A., and Rogers, A. (2007). The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: Mechanisms and environmental interactions. Plant, Cell and Environment, 30, 258–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arneth, A., Lloyd, J., Šantrůčková, H., et al. (2002). Response of central Siberian Scots pine to soil water deficit and long-term trends in atmospheric CO2 concentration. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 16, 1005, 10.1029/2000GB001374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ball, J. T., Woodrow, I. E., and Berry, J. A. (1987). A model predicting stomatal conductance and its contribution to the control of photosynthesis under different environmental conditions. In Progress in Photosynthesis Research, vol. 4, ed. Biggins, J.. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 221–224.Google Scholar

Beerling, D. J., and Royer, D. L. (2002). Reading a CO2 signal from fossil stomata. New Phytologist, 153, 387–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernacchi, C. J., Singsaas, E. L., Pimentel, C., Portis, A. R. J., and Long, S. P. (2001). Improved temperature response functions for models of Rubisco-limited photosynthesis. Plant, Cell and Environment, 24, 253–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernacchi, C. J., Pimentel, C., and Long, S. P. (2003). In vivo temperature response functions of parameters required to model RuBP-limited photosynthesis. Plant, Cell and Environment, 26, 1419–1430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernacchi, C. J., Bagley, J. E., Serbin, S. P., et al. (2013). Modelling C3 photosynthesis from the chloroplast to the ecosystem. Plant, Cell and Environment, 36, 1641–1657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonan, G. B. (1995). Land–atmosphere CO2 exchange simulated by a land surface process model coupled to an atmospheric general circulation model. Journal of Geophysical Research, 100D, 2817–2831.Google Scholar

Brodribb, T. J., and Feild, T. S. (2010). Leaf hydraulic evolution led a surge in leaf photosynthetic capacity during early angiosperm diversification. Ecology Letters, 13, 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brodribb, T. J., Holbrook, N. M., Zwieniecki, M. A., and Palma, B. (2005). Leaf hydraulic capacity in ferns, conifers and angiosperms: Impacts on photosynthetic maxima. New Phytologist, 165, 839–846.Google ScholarPubMed

Brodribb, T. J., Feild, T. S., and Jordan, G. J (2007). Leaf maximum photosynthetic rate and venation are linked by hydraulics. Plant Physiology, 144, 1890–1898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Brugnoli, E., Loreto, F., and Ribas-Carbó, M. (2012). Stable isotopic compositions related to photosynthesis, photorespiration and respiration. In Terrestrial Photosynthesis in a Changing Environment: A Molecular, Physiological and Ecological Approach, ed. Flexas, J., Loreto, F., and Medrano, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 152–168.Google Scholar

Collatz, G. J., Ball, J. T., Grivet, C., and Berry, J. A. (1991). Physiological and environmental regulation of stomatal conductance, photosynthesis and transpiration: A model that includes a laminar boundary layer. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 54, 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collatz, G. J., Ribas-Carbo, M., and Berry, J. A. (1992). Coupled photosynthesis–stomatal conductance model for leaves of C4 plants. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 19, 519–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cowan, I. R. (1977). Stomatal behaviour and environment. Advances in Botanical Research, 4, 117–228.Google Scholar

Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1977). Stomatal function in relation to leaf metabolism and environment. In Integration of Activity in the Higher Plant, ed. Jennings, D. H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 471–505.Google Scholar

Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Bunton, C. B., et al. (1999). The impact of new land surface physics on the GCM simulation of climate and climate sensitivity. Climate Dynamics, 15, 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, S. G., Holmén, K. J., Bonan, G. B., and Rasch, P. J. (1998). Atmospheric CO2 simulated by the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Climate Model, 1: Mean fields and seasonal cycles. Journal of Geophysical Research, 103D, 13213–13235.Google Scholar

Dang, Q. L., Margolis, H. A., Coyea, M. R., Sy, M., and Collatz, G. J. (1997a). Regulation of branch-level gas exchange of boreal trees: Roles of shoot water potential and vapor pressure difference. Tree Physiology, 17, 521–535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dang, Q. L., Margolis, H. A., Sy, M., et al. (1997b). Profiles of photosynthetically active radiation, nitrogen and photosynthetic capacity in the boreal forest: Implications for scaling from leaf to canopy. Journal of Geophysical Research, 102D, 28845–28859.Google Scholar

Dang, Q. L., Margolis, H. A., and Collatz, G. J. (1998). Parameterization and testing of a coupled photosynthesis–stomatal conductance model for boreal trees. Tree Physiology 18, 141–153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

de Boer, H. J., Lammertsma, E. I., Wagner-Cremer, F., et al. (2011). Climate forcing due to optimization of maximal leaf conductance in subtropical vegetation under rising CO2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 108, 4041–4046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

de Boer, H. J., Eppinga, M. B., Wassen, M. J., and Dekker, S. C. (2012). A critical transition in leaf evolution facilitated the Cretaceous angiosperm revolution. Nature Communications, 3, 1221, doi:10.1038/ncomms2217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

De Kauwe, M. G., Medlyn, B. E., Zaehle, S., et al. (2013). Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: A model–data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites. Global Change Biology, 19, 1759–1779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Denning, A. S., Fung, I. Y., and Randall, D. (1995). Latitudinal gradient of atmospheric CO2 due to seasonal exchange with land biota. Nature, 376, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Denning, A. S., Collatz, G. J., Zhang, C., et al. (1996). Simulations of terrestrial carbon metabolism and atmospheric CO2 in a general circulation model. Part 1: Surface carbon fluxes. Tellus B, 48, 521–542.Google Scholar

Diaz-Espejo, A., Bernacchi, C. J., Collatz, G. J., and Sharkey, T. D. (2012). Models of photosynthesis. In Terrestrial Photosynthesis in a Changing Environment: A Molecular, Physiological and Ecological Approach, ed. Flexas, J., Loreto, F., and Medrano, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 98–112.Google Scholar

Dickinson, R. E., Henderson-Sellers, A., Kennedy, P. J., and Wilson, M.F. (1986). Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) for the NCAR Community Climate Model, Technical Note NCAR/TN-275+STR. Boulder, Colorado: National Center for Atmospheric Research.Google Scholar

Dickinson, R. E., Henderson-Sellers, A., and Kennedy, P. J. (1993). Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) Version 1e as Coupled to the NCAR Community Climate Model, Technical Note NCAR/TN-387+STR. Boulder, Colorado: National Center for Atmospheric Research.Google Scholar

Dow, G. J., Bergmann, D. C., and Berry, J. A. (2014). An integrated model of stomatal development and leaf physiology. New Phytologist, 201, 1218–1226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Egea, G., Verhoef, A., and Vidale, P. L. (2011). Towards an improved and more flexible representation of water stress in coupled photosynthesis–stomatal conductance models. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 151, 1370–1384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Farquhar, G. D., and von Caemmerer, S. (1982). Modelling of photosynthetic response to environmental conditions. In Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology New Series, vol. 12B. Physiological Plant Ecology. II. Water Relations and Carbon Assimilation, ed. Lange, O. L., Nobel, P. S., Osmond, C. B., and Ziegler, H.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 549–587.Google Scholar

Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., and Berry, J. A. (1980). A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta, 149, 78–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Farquhar, G. D., O'Leary, M. H., and Berry, J. A. (1982). On the relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 9, 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feild, T. S., Brodribb, T. J., Iglesias, A., et al. (2011). Fossil evidence for Cretaceous escalation in angiosperm leaf vein evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 108, 8363–8366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Field, C., and Mooney, H. A. (1986). The photosynthesis–nitrogen relationship in wild plants. In On the Economy of Plant Form and Function, ed. Givnish, T. J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 25–55.Google Scholar

Flexas, J., Ribas-Carbó, M., Diaz-Espejo, A., Galmés, J., and Medrano, H. (2008). Mesophyll conductance to CO2: Current knowledge and future prospects. Plant, Cell and Environment, 31, 602–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Flexas, J., Brugnoli, E., and Warren, C. R. (2012). Mesophyll conductance to CO2. In Terrestrial Photosynthesis in a Changing Environment: A Molecular, Physiological and Ecological Approach, ed. Flexas, J., Loreto, F., and Medrano, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franks, P. J., and Beerling, D. J. (2009). Maximum leaf conductance driven by CO2 effects on stomatal size and density over geologic time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106, 10343–10347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Franks, P. J., Adams, M. A., Amthor, J. S., et al. (2013). Sensitivity of plants to changing atmospheric CO2 concentration: From the geological past to the next century. New Phytologist, 197, 1077–1094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Franks, P. J., Royer, D. L., Beerling, D. J., et al. (2014). New constraints on atmospheric CO2 concentration for the Phanerozoic. Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 4685–4694, doi:10.1002/2014GL060457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hetherington, A. M., and Woodward, F. I. (2003). The role of stomata in sensing and driving environmental change. Nature, 424, 901–908.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Jarvis, P. G. (1976). The interpretation of the variations in leaf water potential and stomatal conductance found in canopies in the field. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 273, 593–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kattge, J., Knorr, W., Raddatz, T., and Wirth, C. (2009). Quantifying photosynthetic capacity and its relationship to leaf nitrogen content for global-scale terrestrial biosphere models. Global Change Biology, 15, 976–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katul, G. G., Palmroth, S., and Oren, R. (2009). Leaf stomatal responses to vapour pressure deficit under current and CO2-enriched atmosphere explained by the economics of gas exchange. Plant, Cell and Environment, 32, 968–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Katul, G., Manzoni, S., Palmroth, S., and Oren, R. (2010). A stomatal optimization theory to describe the effects of atmospheric CO2 on leaf photosynthesis and transpiration. Annals of Botany, 105, 431–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Körner, C. (1994). Leaf diffusive conductances in the major vegetation types of the globe. In Ecophysiology of Photosynthesis, ed. Schulze, E.-D. and Caldwell, M. M.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 463–490.Google Scholar

Lammertsma, E. I., de Boer, H. J., Dekker, S. C., et al. (2011). Global CO2 rise leads to reduced maximum stomatal conductance in Florida vegetation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 108, 4035–4040.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Larcher, W. (1995). Physiological Plant Ecology, 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leuning, R. (1995). A critical appraisal of a combined stomatal–photosynthesis model for C3 plants. Plant, Cell and Environment, 18, 339–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McElwain, J. C., Beerling, D. J., and Woodward, F. I. (1999). Fossil plants and global warming at the Triassic–Jurassic boundary. Science, 285, 1386–1390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

McKown, A. D., Cochard, H., and Sack, L. (2010). Decoding leaf hydraulics with a spatially explicit model: Principles of venation architecture and implications for its evolution. American Naturalist, 175, 447–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Medlyn, B. E., Dreyer, E., Ellsworth, D., et al. (2002). Temperature response of parameters of a biochemically based model of photosynthesis, II: A review of experimental data. Plant, Cell and Environment, 25, 1167–1179.Google Scholar

Medlyn, B. E., Duursma, R. A., Eamus, D., et al. (2011). Reconciling the optimal and empirical approaches to modelling stomatal conductance. Global Change Biology, 17, 2134–2144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Medlyn, B. E., Duursma, R. A., De Kauwe, M. G., and Prentice, I. C. (2013). The optimal stomatal response to atmospheric CO2 concentration: Alternative solutions, alternative interpretations. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 182/183, 200–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Medrano, H., Gulías, J., Chaves, M. M., Galmés, J., and Flexas, J. (2012). Photosynthetic water-use efficiency. In Terrestrial Photosynthesis in a Changing Environment: A Molecular, Physiological and Ecological Approach, ed. Flexas, J., Loreto, F., and Medrano, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 523–536.Google Scholar

Nowak, R. S., Ellsworth, D. S., and Smith, S. D. (2004). Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2:Do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions?New Phytologist, 162, 253–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rogers, A. (2014). The use and misuse of Vc,max in Earth System Models. Photosynthesis Research, 119, 15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Royer, D. L., Wing, S. L., Beerling, D. J., et al. (2001). Paleobotanical evidence for near present-day levels of atmospheric CO2 during part of the Tertiary. Science, 292, 2310–2313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sellers, P. J., Mintz, Y., Sud, Y. C., and Dalcher, A. (1986). A simple biosphere model (SiB) for use within general circulation models. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 43, 505–531.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sellers, P. J., Randall, D. A., Collatz, G.J., et al. (1996). A revised land surface parameterization (SiB2) for atmospheric GCMs, Part I: Model formulation. Journal of Climate, 9, 676–705.Google Scholar

Verhoef, A., and Egea, G. (2014). Modeling plant transpiration under limited soil water: Comparison of different plant and soil hydraulic parameterizations and preliminary implications for their use in land surface models. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 191, 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vico, G., Manzoni, S., Palmroth, S., Weih, M. and Katul, G. (2013). A perspective on optimal leaf stomatal conductance under CO2 and light co-limitations. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 182/183, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

von Caemmerer, S. (2000). Biochemical Models of Leaf Photosynthesis.Collingwood, Victoria: CSIRO Publishing.Google Scholar

von Caemmerer, S. (2013). Steady-state models of photosynthesis. Plant, Cell and Environment, 36, 1617–1630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

von Caemmerer, S., Farquhar, G., and Berry, J. (2009). Biochemical model of C3 photosynthesis. In Photosynthesis in silico: Understanding Complexity from Molecules to Ecosystems, ed. Laisk, A., Nedbal, L. and Govindjee, . Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 209–230.Google Scholar

Wang, D., Heckathorn, S. A., Wang, X., and Philpott, S. M. (2012). A meta-analysis of plant physiological and growth responses to temperature and elevated CO2. Oecologia, 169, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wong, S. C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1978). Leaf conductance in relation to assimilation in Eucalyptus pauciflora Sieb. ex Spreng. Plant Physiology, 62, 670–674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wong, S.-C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1979). Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature, 282, 424–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wong, S.-C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1985a). Leaf conductance in relation to rate of CO2 assimilation, I: Influence of nitrogen nutrition, phosphorus nutrition, photon flux density, and ambient partial pressure of CO2 during ontogeny. Plant Physiology, 78, 821–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wong, S.-C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1985b). Leaf conductance in relation to rate of CO2 assimilation, II: Effects of short-term exposures to different photon flux densities. Plant Physiology, 78, 826–829.Google Scholar

Wong, S.-C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. (1985c). Leaf conductance in relation to rate of CO2 assimilation, III: Influences of water stress and photoinhibition. Plant Physiology, 78, 830–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Woodward, F. I. (1987). Stomatal numbers are sensitive to increases in CO2 from pre-industrial levels. Nature, 327, 617–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wullschleger, S. D. (1993). Biochemical limitations to carbon assimilation in C3 plants – a retrospective analysis of the A/Ci curves from 109 species. Journal of Experimental Botany, 44, 907–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zhou, S., Duursma, R. A., Medlyn, B. E., Kelly, J. W. G., and Prentice, I. C. (2013). How should we model plant responses to drought? An analysis of stomatal and non-stomatal responses to water stress. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 182/183, 204–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar