Maximum temperatures across the Asian continent from Europe to China could be 3°C to 5°C higher than previous estimates – because the forests and grasslands will respond in a different way. Australian scientists report in the journal Scientific Reports that they looked at the forecasts made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change under the notorious “business-as-usual” scenario, in which the world’s nations go on burning ever more fossil fuels, to release ever more greenhouse gases. The average global temperatures will rise steadily – but this rise will be accompanied by ever greater and more frequent extremes of heat. But then Jatin Kala of Murdoch University in Perth, Western Australia, and colleagues factored in the responses of the plants to rising temperatures. They looked at data from 314 species of plant from 54 research field sites. In particular, they investigated stomatas, tiny pores on the leaves through which plants absorb carbon dioxide and shed water to the atmosphere. Response crucial What matters is how vegetation responds to extremes of heat. Researchers have already established that plants respond, not always helpfully: extremes can alter the atmospheric chemistry unfavourably for plants, and certainly reduce crop yields. But other scientists have confirmed the so-called carbon dioxide fertilisation effect: as more carbon becomes available, plants use water more economically and so even though drylands may get drier the landscape can also get greener, and growth tends to begin ever earlier as winters get warmer, and spring arrives earlier. Dr Kala and his fellow researchers used their field observation data to model the response of species, and types of plants, to higher temperatures, and to make some estimates of the balance of carbon taken up by the stomata, and the water released. There has been an assumption that plants respond to temperature in roughly the same way. But there can be considerable variation. The scientists found, overall, that the response of the plants became increasingly important: over Eurasia – they decided not to model the pattern in North America because cloudiness introduced extra uncertainties – needleleaf forests, tundra and farmland would actually release lower levels of water into the atmosphere