1982
DOI: 10.1007/bf00378385
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cycling of organic and inorganic sulphur in a chestnut oak forest

Abstract: Sulfur (S) cycling in a chestnut oak forest on Walker Branch Watershed, Tennessee, was dominated by geochemical processes involving sulfate. Even though available SO was present far in excess of forest nutritional requirements, the ecosystem as a whole accumulated ∼60% of incoming SO-S. Most (90%) of this accumulation occurred by SO adsorption in sesquioxide-rich subsurface soils, with a relatively minor amount accumulating and cycling as SO within vegetative components. Organic sulfates are thought to constit… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
24
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2004
2004

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we do not know if this 'deficiency' applies to the sweetgum stand studied here at this stage of stand development. The N increments in these stands (16-18 kg ha À1 year À1 ) approximately equal atmospheric N deposition (12-15 kg ha À1 year À1 ), as is the case in nearby Walker Branch Watershed (Johnson et al 1982). (We note that atmospheric N deposition rates measured here were somewhat higher than the value of 10 kg ha À1 year À1 measured with much more sophistication at a nearby Pinus taeda L. stand during 1985-1988Johnson and Lindberg 1992).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 47%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, we do not know if this 'deficiency' applies to the sweetgum stand studied here at this stage of stand development. The N increments in these stands (16-18 kg ha À1 year À1 ) approximately equal atmospheric N deposition (12-15 kg ha À1 year À1 ), as is the case in nearby Walker Branch Watershed (Johnson et al 1982). (We note that atmospheric N deposition rates measured here were somewhat higher than the value of 10 kg ha À1 year À1 measured with much more sophistication at a nearby Pinus taeda L. stand during 1985-1988Johnson and Lindberg 1992).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 47%
“…Reasons for the reduced soil solution SO 2À 4 with elevated CO 2 are not clear. Although we do not have uptake data, but we do not feel that uptake was a major factor, based on previous research which has shown that S uptake is generally much lower than leaching in forests of this area (Johnson et al 1982). Soil solution pH differences do not explain the differences in soil solution SO 2À 4 , either: the greater soil solution pH with elevated CO 2 would be expected to cause higher soil solution SO 2À 4 (and perhaps also ortho-P) concentrations because of desorption from soils.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Adsorption is an important mechanism of sulphate retention in soils rich in iron and aluminium hydrous oxides (Johnson et al, 1982); however, adsorbed sulphate generally comprises less than 30% of the total sulphur pool in soils located north of the most recent continental glaciation (Rochelle et al, 1987;Mitchell et al, 1992;Houle and Carignan, 1995). Precipitation of aluminium hydroxy sulphate minerals may also be an important means of sulphate retention in extremely acidic soils subject to high levels of sulphur input (Khanna et al, 1987).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 ' 8 " 10 Abiotic adsorption has been thought to be the primary mechanism for sulfate retention in some forest soils. 5 ' 8 ' 11 Most forest soil sulfur is found in the organic constituents ester sulfate and C-bonded S 6 ' 12 however, suggesting that transformations involving this large pool of organic sulfur may also regulate sulfate flux. Recent laboratory and soil column work has indicated that sulfate is immobilized into organic sulfur forms very quickly and in large quantities.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Many factors other than acidic deposition influence sulfate flux, however. Sulfur transformations such as adsorption/desorption and mineralization/immobilization strongly regulate sulfate cycling through forest systems.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%