The response of the terrestrial carbon cycle to climate change is among the largest uncertainties affecting future climate change projections. The feedback between the terrestrial carbon cycle and climate is partly determined by changes in the turnover time of carbon in land ecosystems, which in turn is an ecosystem property that emerges from the interplay between climate, soil and vegetation type. Here we present a global, spatially explicit and observation-based assessment of whole-ecosystem carbon turnover times that combines new estimates of vegetation and soil organic carbon stocks and fluxes. We find that the overall mean global carbon turnover time is 23(+7)(-4) years (95 per cent confidence interval). On average, carbon resides in the vegetation and soil near the Equator for a shorter time than at latitudes north of 75° north (mean turnover times of 15 and 255 years, respectively). We identify a clear dependence of the turnover time on temperature, as expected from our present understanding of temperature controls on ecosystem dynamics. Surprisingly, our analysis also reveals a similarly strong association between turnover time and precipitation. Moreover, we find that the ecosystem carbon turnover times simulated by state-of-the-art coupled climate/carbon-cycle models vary widely and that numerical simulations, on average, tend to underestimate the global carbon turnover time by 36 per cent. The models show stronger spatial relationships with temperature than do observation-based estimates, but generally do not reproduce the strong relationships with precipitation and predict faster carbon turnover in many semi-arid regions. Our findings suggest that future climate/carbon-cycle feedbacks may depend more strongly on changes in the hydrological cycle than is expected at present and is considered in Earth system models.

Aim To infer a forest carbon density map at 0.01°resolution from a radar remote sensing product for the estimation of carbon stocks in Northern Hemisphere boreal and temperate forests. LocationThe study area extends from 30°N to 80°N, covering three forest biomes -temperate broadleaf and mixed forests (TBMF), temperate conifer forests (TCF) and boreal forests (BFT) -over three continents (North America, Europe and Asia). MethodsThis study is based on a recently available growing stock volume (GSV) product retrieved from synthetic aperture radar data. Forest biomass and spatially explicit uncertainty estimates were derived from the GSV using existing databases of wood density and allometric relationships between biomass compartments (stem, branches, roots, foliage). We tested the resultant map against inventorybased biomass data from Russia, Europe and the USA prior to making intercontinent and interbiome carbon stock comparisons.Results Our derived carbon density map agrees well with inventory data at regional scales (r 2 = 0.70-0.90). While 40.7 ± 15.7 petagram of carbon (Pg C) are stored in BFT, TBMF and TCF contain 24.5 ± 9.4 Pg C and 14.5 ± 4.8 Pg C, respectively. In terms of carbon density, we found 6.21 ± 2.07 kg C m −2 retained in TCF and 5.80 ± 2.21 kg C m −2 in TBMF, whereas BFT have a mean carbon density of 4.00 ± 1.54 kg C m −2 . Indications of a higher carbon density in Europe compared with the other continents across each of the three biomes could not be proved to be significant. Main conclusionsThe presented carbon density and corresponding uncertainty map give an insight into the spatial patterns of biomass and stand as a new benchmark to improve carbon cycle models and carbon monitoring systems. In total, we found 79.8 ± 29.9 Pg C stored in northern boreal and temperate forests, with Asian BFT accounting for 22.1 ± 8.3 Pg C.

No abstract

Lateral transport of carbon plays an important role in linking the carbon cycles of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. There is, however, a lack of information on the factors controlling one of the main C sources of this lateral flux, i.e., the concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in soil solution across large spatial scales and under different soil, vegetation, and climate conditions. We compiled a database on DOC in soil solution down to 80 cm and analyzed it with the aim, first, to quantify the differences in DOC concentrations among terrestrial ecosystems, climate zones, soil, and vegetation types at global scale and second, to identify potential determinants of the site-to-site variability of DOC concentration in soil solution across European broadleaved and coniferous forests. We found that DOC concentrations were 75% lower in mineral than in organic soil, and temperate sites showed higher DOC concentrations than boreal and tropical sites. The majority of the variation (R 2 = 0.67-0.99) in DOC concentrations in mineral European forest soils correlates with NH 4 + , C/N, Al, and Fe as the most important predictors. Overall, our results show that the magnitude (23% lower in broadleaved than in coniferous forests) and the controlling factors of DOC in soil solution differ between forest types, with site productivity being more important in broadleaved forests and water balance in coniferous stands.

Tree-grass ecosystems are widely distributed. However, their phenology has not yet been fully characterized. The technique of repeated digital photographs for plant phenology monitoring (hereafter referred as PhenoCam) provide opportunities for long-term monitoring of plant phenology, and extracting phenological transition dates (PTDs, e.g., start of the growing season). Here, we aim to evaluate the utility of near-infrared-enabled PhenoCam for monitoring the phenology of structure (i.e., greenness) and physiology (i.e., gross primary productivity-GPP) at four tree-grass Mediterranean sites. We computed four vegetation indexes (VIs) from PhenoCams: (1) green chromatic coordinates (GCC), (2) normalized difference vegetation index (CamNDVI), (3) near-infrared reflectance of vegetation index (CamNIRv), and (4) ratio vegetation index (CamRVI). GPP is derived from eddy covariance flux tower measurement. Then, we extracted PTDs and their uncertainty from different VIs and GPP. The consistency between structural (VIs) and physiological (GPP) phenology was then evaluated. CamNIRv is best at representing the PTDs of GPP during the Green-up period, while CamNDVI is best during the Dry-down period. Moreover, CamNIRv outperforms the other VIs in tracking growing season length of GPP. In summary, the results show it is promising to track structural