Response of soil respiration and soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen to grazing management in the Loess Plateau, China

Abstract

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> Grassland covers more than a third of the earth's terrestrial surface. Grazing management can affect grassland carbon dynamics and soil microbial biomass, yet limited information is available on the effects of grassland management on carbon dioxide efflux and soil microbial biomass carbon (SMBC) and nitrogen (SMBN). During 2010 and 2011, soil respiration (Rs), SMBC, and SMBN, as well as different abiotic and biotic factors were measured after long term rotational grazing (nine years) on the grasslands of the semi-arid Loess Plateau, China. Grazing management included different grazing intensities and seasonal grazing patterns (in summer or winter). Stocking rates of 0, 2.7, 5.6, and 8.7 sheep ha<sup>−1</sup> were used as grazing intensities, and warm-season grazing and cold-season grazing by sheep during summer and winter from 2010 to 2011 were used as grazing patterns. We hypothesized that the different seasonal grazing patterns and grazing intensities would affect Rs in a semi-arid grassland ecosystem. Our results indicated that grazing management significantly affected the rate of Rs, which supports our hypothesis. Grazing intensities tended to increase SMBC, but had no effect on SMBN. We also found that SMBC in cold season grazing plots was higher than that in the warm season grazing plots. However, variation in grazing patterns had little effect on SMBN. Furthermore, a structural equation model indicated that the aboveground biomass and soil microbial biomass were two important biotic factors that controlled Rs. Soil temperature (ST) and soil moisture (SM), which were affected by grazing intensity and patterns, were significant abiotic factors affecting Rs and soil microbial biomass. Our observations suggest that grazing management may change soil carbon sequestration rates in grassland ecosystems, because of changes in the aboveground plant and soil microbial biomass.</p>

Grassland rehabilitation significantly increases soil carbon stocks by reducing net soil CO2 emissions

“…The strong positive correlation between gross soil CO 2 emission and aboveground biomass production ( r = 0.91; Table 3) agreed with results from other studies (e.g. Bahn et al, 2008; Frank & Dugas, 2001; Wang et al, 2019). Wang et al (2019) found that aboveground biomass, which is related to belowground biomass, was a critical biotic factor controlling soil respiration in the Loess Plateau, China.…”

“…Bahn et al, 2008; Frank & Dugas, 2001; Wang et al, 2019). Wang et al (2019) found that aboveground biomass, which is related to belowground biomass, was a critical biotic factor controlling soil respiration in the Loess Plateau, China. In support, Frank and Dugas (2001) reported direct links between gross CO 2 and plant root activities in a semiarid mixed‐grass prairie in North Dakota, USA.…”

“…In general, soil respiration is driven not only by individual factors but also by their interactions. For example, soil CO 2 fluxes in the topsoil layer highly depend on soil temperature, which is regulated by aboveground biomass, grass cover, season, daytime, substrate inputs and quality (Curiel Yuste et al, 2007; Wang et al, 2019). In support, Abdalla et al (2016) reported positive correlations between soil CO 2 emission on the one hand, and topsoil moisture and temperature on the other hand in another burnt grassland trial.…”

“…In general, soil respiration is driven not only by individual factors but also by their interactions. For example, soil CO 2 fluxes in the topsoil layer highly depend on soil temperature, which is regulated by aboveground biomass, grass cover, season, daytime, substrate inputs and quality (Curiel Yuste et al, 2007;Wang et al, 2019).…”

Protocolo de medición de CO2 para determinar la cantidad mínima en peso de muestras de suelo y mantillo

“…La alta variabilidad de la Rs puede ocasionar incertidumbre en las estimaciones. Las metodologías para medir la respiración del suelo, incluyen el uso de cámaras dinámicas que miden la concentración de CO 2 en un volumen y en un plazo de tiempo determinado, por lo que las mediciones varían en relación a las condiciones del sitio donde se llevan a cabo (Wang et al, 2019;Bayona-Rodríguez, Ávila, Rincon y Romero, 2015). Además de los factores naturales que inf luyen en la Rs, Cueva, Bahn, Litvak, Pumpanen y Vargas, (2015) mencionan que también puede haber errores en la medición debido a la mala calibración del equipo, o mal funcionamiento y errores de tipo humano.…”