Warming‐induced global soil carbon loss attenuated by downward carbon movement

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 7242-7254
Author(s):  
Zhongkui Luo ◽  
Yiqi Luo ◽  
Guocheng Wang ◽  
Jianyang Xia ◽  
Changhui Peng
Keyword(s):  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Carbon Loss ◽  
Global Soil

scholarly journals Assessing Wood and Soil Carbon Losses from a Forest-Peat Fire in the Boreo-Nemoral Zone

Forests ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 880
Author(s):  
Andrey Sirin ◽  
Alexander Maslov ◽  
Dmitry Makarov ◽  
Yakov Gulbe ◽  
Hans Joosten
Keyword(s):  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Stand Structure ◽  
Peat Soil ◽  
Burned Area ◽  
Tree Biomass ◽  
Carbon Loss ◽  
Forest Stand Structure ◽  
Peat Fire ◽  
Peat Fires ◽  
Carbon Losses

Forest-peat fires are notable for their difficulty in estimating carbon losses. Combined carbon losses from tree biomass and peat soil were estimated at an 8 ha forest-peat fire in the Moscow region after catastrophic fires in 2010. The loss of tree biomass carbon was assessed by reconstructing forest stand structure using the classification of pre-fire high-resolution satellite imagery and after-fire ground survey of the same forest classes in adjacent areas. Soil carbon loss was assessed by using the root collars of stumps to reconstruct the pre-fire soil surface and interpolating the peat characteristics of adjacent non-burned areas. The mean (median) depth of peat losses across the burned area was 15 ± 8 (14) cm, varying from 13 ± 5 (11) to 20 ± 9 (19). Loss of soil carbon was 9.22 ± 3.75–11.0 ± 4.96 (mean) and 8.0–11.0 kg m−2 (median); values exceeding 100 tC ha−1 have also been found in other studies. The estimated soil carbon loss for the entire burned area, 98 (mean) and 92 (median) tC ha−1, significantly exceeds the carbon loss from live (tree) biomass, which averaged 58.8 tC ha−1. The loss of carbon in the forest-peat fire thus equals the release of nearly 400 (soil) and, including the biomass, almost 650 tCO2 ha−1 into the atmosphere, which illustrates the underestimated impact of boreal forest-peat fires on atmospheric gas concentrations and climate.

scholarly journals Estimating Annual Soil Carbon Loss in Agricultural Peatland Soils Using a Nitrogen Budget Approach

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e0121432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilie R. Kirk ◽  
Chris van Kessel ◽  
William R. Horwath ◽  
Bruce A. Linquist
Keyword(s):  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Nitrogen Budget ◽  
Carbon Loss

scholarly journals Comparing soil carbon loss through respiration and leaching under extreme precipitation events in arid and semi-arid grasslands

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting Liu ◽  
Liang Wang ◽  
Xiaojuan Feng ◽  
Jinbo Zhang ◽  
Tian Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Extreme Precipitation ◽  
Dissolved Inorganic Carbon ◽  
Precipitation Event ◽  
Carbon Loss ◽  
Research Attention ◽  
Extreme Precipitation Events ◽  
Leaching Loss ◽  
Arid And Semiarid

Abstract. Respiration and leaching are two main processes responsible for soil carbon loss. While the former has received considerable research attention, studies examining leaching processes are limited especially in semiarid grasslands due to low precipitation. Climate change may increase the extreme precipitation event (EPE) frequency in arid and semiarid regions, potentially enhancing soil carbon loss through leaching and respiration. Here we incubated soil columns of three typical grassland soils from Inner Mongolia and Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and examined the effect of simulated EPEs on soil carbon loss through respiration and leaching. EPEs induced transient increase of soil respiration, equivalent to 32 % and 72 % of the net ecosystem productivity (NEP) in the temperate grasslands (Xilinhot and Keqi) and 7 % in the alpine grasslands (Gangcha). By comparison, leaching loss of soil carbon accounted for 290 %, 120 % and 15 % of NEP at the corresponding sites, respectively, with dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) as the main form of carbon loss in the alkaline soils. Moreover, DIC loss increased with re-occuring EPEs in the soil with the highest pH due to increased dissolution of soil carbonates and elevated contribution of dissolved CO2 from organic carbon degradation (indicated by DIC-δ13C). These results highlight that leaching loss of soil carbon (particularly DIC) is important in the regional carbon budget of arid and semiarid grasslands. With a projected increase of EPEs under climate change, soil carbon leaching processes and its influencing factors warrant better understanding and should be incorporated into soil carbon models when estimating carbon balance in grassland ecosystems.

scholarly journals Sensitivity of global soil carbon stocks to combined nutrient enrichment

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 936-945 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. W. Crowther ◽  
C. Riggs ◽  
E. M. Lind ◽  
E. T. Borer ◽  
E. W. Seabloom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Nutrient Enrichment ◽  
Carbon Stocks ◽  
Global Soil ◽  
Soil Carbon Stocks

scholarly journals Microbial responses to warming enhance soil carbon loss following translocation across a tropical forest elevation gradient

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 1889-1899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew T. Nottingham ◽  
Jeanette Whitaker ◽  
Nick J. Ostle ◽  
Richard D. Bardgett ◽  
Niall P. McNamara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tropical Forest ◽  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Elevation Gradient ◽  
Carbon Loss ◽  
Microbial Responses

scholarly journals Direct observation of permafrost degradation and rapid soil carbon loss in tundra

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 627-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
César Plaza ◽  
Elaine Pegoraro ◽  
Rosvel Bracho ◽  
Gerardo Celis ◽  
Kathryn G. Crummer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Direct Observation ◽  
Permafrost Degradation ◽  
Carbon Loss

Unrecognized threat to global soil carbon by a widespread invasive species

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. O’Bryan ◽  
Nicholas R. Patton ◽  
Jim Hone ◽  
Jesse S. Lewis ◽  
Violeta Berdejo‐Espinola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Invasive Species ◽  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Global Soil

scholarly journals Causes of variation in soil carbon simulations from CMIP5 Earth system models and comparison with observations

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 1717-1736 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. E. O. Todd-Brown ◽  
J. T. Randerson ◽  
W. M. Post ◽  
F. M. Hoffman ◽  
C. Tarnocai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Soil Carbon ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Carbon Stocks ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Northern Latitudes ◽  
Global Soil ◽  
Soil Carbon Stocks ◽  
Reduced Complexity ◽  
Earth System Models

Abstract. Stocks of soil organic carbon represent a large component of the carbon cycle that may participate in climate change feedbacks, particularly on decadal and centennial timescales. For Earth system models (ESMs), the ability to accurately represent the global distribution of existing soil carbon stocks is a prerequisite for accurately predicting future carbon–climate feedbacks. We compared soil carbon simulations from 11 model centers to empirical data from the Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD) and the Northern Circumpolar Soil Carbon Database (NCSCD). Model estimates of global soil carbon stocks ranged from 510 to 3040 Pg C, compared to an estimate of 1260 Pg C (with a 95% confidence interval of 890–1660 Pg C) from the HWSD. Model simulations for the high northern latitudes fell between 60 and 820 Pg C, compared to 500 Pg C (with a 95% confidence interval of 380–620 Pg C) for the NCSCD and 290 Pg C for the HWSD. Global soil carbon varied 5.9 fold across models in response to a 2.6-fold variation in global net primary productivity (NPP) and a 3.6-fold variation in global soil carbon turnover times. Model–data agreement was moderate at the biome level (R2 values ranged from 0.38 to 0.97 with a mean of 0.75); however, the spatial distribution of soil carbon simulated by the ESMs at the 1° scale was not well correlated with the HWSD (Pearson correlation coefficients less than 0.4 and root mean square errors from 9.4 to 20.8 kg C m−2). In northern latitudes where the two data sets overlapped, agreement between the HWSD and the NCSCD was poor (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.33), indicating uncertainty in empirical estimates of soil carbon. We found that a reduced complexity model dependent on NPP and soil temperature explained much of the 1° spatial variation in soil carbon within most ESMs (R2 values between 0.62 and 0.93 for 9 of 11 model centers). However, the same reduced complexity model only explained 10% of the spatial variation in HWSD soil carbon when driven by observations of NPP and temperature, implying that other drivers or processes may be more important in explaining observed soil carbon distributions. The reduced complexity model also showed that differences in simulated soil carbon across ESMs were driven by differences in simulated NPP and the parameterization of soil heterotrophic respiration (inter-model R2 = 0.93), not by structural differences between the models. Overall, our results suggest that despite fair global-scale agreement with observational data and moderate agreement at the biome scale, most ESMs cannot reproduce grid-scale variation in soil carbon and may be missing key processes. Future work should focus on improving the simulation of driving variables for soil carbon stocks and modifying model structures to include additional processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document