Precipitation manipulation and terrestrial carbon cycling: The roles of treatment magnitude, experimental duration and local climate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinsong Wang ◽  
Dashuan Tian ◽  
Alan K. Knapp ◽  
Han Y. H. Chen ◽  
Yiqi Luo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
Local Climate ◽  
Precipitation Manipulation

Variable silicon accumulation in plants affects terrestrial carbon cycling by controlling lignin synthesis

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. e183-e189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thimo Klotzbücher ◽  
Anika Klotzbücher ◽  
Klaus Kaiser ◽  
Doris Vetterlein ◽  
Reinhold Jahn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
Lignin Synthesis ◽  
Silicon Accumulation

scholarly journals The value of soil respiration measurements for interpreting and modeling terrestrial carbon cycling

2016 ◽  
Vol 413 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire L. Phillips ◽  
Ben Bond-Lamberty ◽  
Ankur R. Desai ◽  
Martin Lavoie ◽  
Dave Risk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil Respiration ◽  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon

Synergistic effects of four climate change drivers on terrestrial carbon cycling

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 787-793
Author(s):  
Peter B. Reich ◽  
Sarah E. Hobbie ◽  
Tali D. Lee ◽  
Roy Rich ◽  
Melissa A. Pastore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Synergistic Effects ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
Climate Change Drivers

scholarly journals Sources of Uncertainty in Modeled Land Carbon Storage within and across Three MIPs: Diagnosis with Three New Techniques

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 2833-2851 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sha Zhou ◽  
Junyi Liang ◽  
Xingjie Lu ◽  
Qianyu Li ◽  
Lifen Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycle ◽  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Carbon Storage ◽  
Residence Time ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
New Techniques ◽  
Intercomparison Project ◽  
Storage Potential

Terrestrial carbon cycle models have incorporated increasingly more processes as a means to achieve more-realistic representations of ecosystem carbon cycling. Despite this, there are large across-model variations in the simulation and projection of carbon cycling. Several model intercomparison projects (MIPs), for example, the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) (historical simulations), Trends in Net Land–Atmosphere Carbon Exchange (TRENDY), and Multiscale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project (MsTMIP), have sought to understand intermodel differences. In this study, the authors developed a suite of new techniques to conduct post-MIP analysis to gain insights into uncertainty sources across 25 models in the three MIPs. First, terrestrial carbon storage dynamics were characterized by a three-dimensional (3D) model output space with coordinates of carbon residence time, net primary productivity (NPP), and carbon storage potential. The latter represents the potential of an ecosystem to lose or gain carbon. This space can be used to measure how and why model output differs. Models with a nitrogen cycle generally exhibit lower annual NPP in comparison with other models, and mostly negative carbon storage potential. Second, a transient traceability framework was used to decompose any given carbon cycle model into traceable components and identify the sources of model differences. The carbon residence time (or NPP) was traced to baseline carbon residence time (or baseline NPP related to the maximum carbon input), environmental scalars, and climate forcing. Third, by applying a variance decomposition method, the authors show that the intermodel differences in carbon storage can be mainly attributed to the baseline carbon residence time and baseline NPP (>90% in the three MIPs). The three techniques developed in this study offer a novel approach to gain more insight from existing MIPs and can point out directions for future MIPs. Since this study is conducted at the global scale for an overview on intermodel differences, future studies should focus more on regional analysis to identify the sources of uncertainties and improve models at the specified mechanism level.

scholarly journals A global database of plant production and carbon exchange from global change manipulative experiments

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian Song ◽  
Jingyi Ru ◽  
Mengmei Zheng ◽  
Haidao Wang ◽  
Yongge Fan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Change ◽  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Plant Production ◽  
Atmospheric Composition ◽  
Carbon Exchange ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
Global Database ◽  
Precipitation Regimes ◽  
Manipulative Experiments ◽  
Global Change Scenarios

Abstract Numerous ecosystem manipulative experiments have been conducted since 1970/80 s to elucidate responses of terrestrial carbon cycling to the changing atmospheric composition (CO2 enrichment and nitrogen deposition) and climate (warming and changing precipitation regimes), which is crucial for model projection and mitigation of future global change effects. Here, we extract data from 2,242 publications that report global change manipulative experiments and build a comprehensive global database with 5,213 pairs of samples for plant production (productivity, biomass, and litter mass) and ecosystem carbon exchange (gross and net ecosystem productivity as well as ecosystem and soil respiration). Information on climate characteristics and vegetation types of experimental sites as well as experimental facilities and manipulation magnitudes subjected to manipulative experiments are also included in this database. This global database can facilitate the estimation of response and sensitivity of key terrestrial carbon-cycling variables under future global change scenarios, and improve the robust projection of global change‒terrestrial carbon feedbacks imposed by Earth System Models.

scholarly journals Corrigendum: Importance of vegetation dynamics for future terrestrial carbon cycling (2015 Environ. Res. Lett. 10 054019)

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 089501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Ahlström ◽  
Jianyang Xia ◽  
Almut Arneth ◽  
Yiqi Luo ◽  
Benjamin Smith
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Vegetation Dynamics ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon

scholarly journals Spatial Heterogeneity of Soil Respiration Response to Precipitation Pulse in a Temperate Mixed Forest in Central China

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanchun Liu ◽  
Qing Shang ◽  
Zhongwei Wang ◽  
Kesheng Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Soil Respiration ◽  
Spatial Heterogeneity ◽  
Carbon Cycling ◽  
Biological Activities ◽  
Mixed Forest ◽  
Central China ◽  
Terrestrial Carbon ◽  
Size Classes ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Precipitation Pulse

Water availability is one of the fundamental drivers for biological activities and terrestrial carbon cycling. Although the response of soil respiration to precipitation has been well documented in arid and semiarid ecosystems, our understanding of its pattern in forests is rather limited. This study was conducted to examine the difference of precipitation effect on soil respiration under different canopy conditions in a temperate coniferous (Pinus armandii Franch) and broadleaved (Quercus aliena var. acuteserrata) mixed forest in Central China. The results showed that precipitation significantly reduced soil temperature, but increased soil volumetric water content and soil respiration (6.0%-35.3%). Precipitation caused a greater increment in soil respiration beneath the canopy of broadleaved trees (24.2%) than that beneath coniferous ones (13.5%). Precipitation-induced increase in soil respiration was consistently lower beneath the canopy of small size classes (7.1%-32.6%) than large size classes (9.5%-33.3%). Mean soil respiration of forest gaps increased 22.4% following precipitations. Our study highlights the positive response of soil respiration to precipitation pulses in water-unlimited ecosystems. The findings suggest that the spatial heterogeneity of soil respiration to precipitation pulse under different canopy conditions should be emphasized while assessing terrestrial carbon cycling and its feedback to climate change.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document