Temperature Sensitivity of Black Carbon Decomposition and Oxidation

Nguyen, Binh Thanh; Lehmann, Johannes; Hockaday, William C.; Joseph, Stephen; Masiello, Caroline A.

doi:10.1021/es903016y

Cited by 319 publications

(197 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

178

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The cumulative C mineralization decreased as the charred temperature increased from 300 • C to 600 • C, at the same time, the labile organic carbon content decrease from 133 mg g −1 of C 1 to 68 mg g −1 of C 2 . The result was consistent with the finding of Nguyen et al (2010) who concluded that as the charred temperature increased, the more resistant compounds are formed. With the mineralization of easily degradable C, the difference between 2% and 4% biochar was not obvious in later incubation period.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Effects of wheat straw biochar on carbon mineralization and guidance for large-scale soil quality improvement in the coastal wetland

Sun

Wang

et al. 2014

Ecological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tTo study the effects of wheat straw and its biochar on carbon mineralization in saline soil, we investigated the changes of carbon (C) mineralization rate with different carbon sources under constant moisture (CM) and drying-rewetting (DW) cycles in a homoeothermic incubator. Six treatments including control (C), wheat straw (S+W), 300 • C wheat straw biochar (S+C 1 ), 600 • C wheat straw biochar (S+C 2 ), double 300 • C wheat straw biochar (S+2C 1 ) and combination of wheat straw and its biochar (S+W+C 1 ) were evaluated in the present study. Application wheat straw to the soil resulted in the higher release of CO 2 than that of the treatment of S+C 1 and S+C 2 . However, the CO 2 release of S+W+C 1 treatment was lower as compared to wheat straw alone, which can be ascribed to the higher adsorption of biochar for organic matter. Rewetting the dried treatments caused higher release of CO 2 than that of CM, but the cumulative C mineralization of DW was less than that of CM in all treatments. The extent of reduction between DW and CM was less pronounced in S+2C 1 and S+W+C 1 especially with increasing DW cycles. The results suggested that the flush of mineralized C in rewetting period can be partly compensate for the reduction of mineralized C during the drying period. The fact can be explained by the good adjustability of "r-strategist" microbes in rewetting period and the provision of better physical habitats by biochar. In general, the stress of DW cycles on saline soils could be effectively reduced with biochar application especially with low charred temperature biochar.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Effects of wheat straw biochar on carbon mineralization and guidance for large-scale soil quality improvement in the coastal wetland

Sun

Wang

et al. 2014

Ecological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…29). Spectroscopic characterization shows that combustion temperature affects the degree of aromaticity and the size of aromatic sheets, which in turn determine short-term mineralization rates 22,[34][35][36] . To reconcile the observations of decomposability with the old radiocarbon ages of fire-derived carbon deposits 37,38 , it has been suggested that physical protection and interactions with soil minerals play a significant part in black-carbon stability over long periods of time 39 .…”

Section: Soil Humic Substancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property

Schmidt

Torn

Abiven

et al. 2011

Nature

Self Cite

4,457

104

3,106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, soil organic matter (SOM) contains more than three times as much carbon as either the atmosphere or terrestrial vegetation. Yet it remains largely unknown why some SOM persists for millennia whereas other SOM decomposes readily-and this limits our ability to predict how soils will respond to climate change. Recent analytical and experimental advances have demonstrated that molecular structure alone does not control SOM stability: in fact, environmental and biological controls predominate. Here we propose ways to include this understanding in a new generation of experiments and soil carbon models, thereby improving predictions of the SOM response to global warming.Understanding soil biogeochemistry is essential to the stewardship of ecosystem services provided by soils, such as soil fertility (for food, fibre and fuel production), water quality, resistance to erosion and climate mitigation through reduced feedbacks to climate change. Soils store at least three times as much carbon (in SOM) as is found in either the atmosphere or in living plants 1 . This major pool of organic carbon is sensitive to changes in climate or local environment, but how and on what timescale will it respond to such changes? The feedbacks between soil organic carbon and climate are not fully understood, so we are not fully able to answer these questions 2-7 , but we can explore them using numerical models of soil-organic-carbon cycling. We can not only simulate feedbacks between climate change and ecosystems, but also evaluate management options and analyse carbon sequestration and biofuel strategies. These models, however, rest on some assumptions that have been challenged and even disproved by recent research arising from new isotopic, spectroscopic and molecularmarker techniques and long-term field experiments.Here we describe how recent evidence has led to a framework for understanding SOM cycling, and we highlight new approaches that could lead us to a new generation of soil carbon models, which could better reflect observations and inform predictions and policies.

show abstract

“…As observed by Kuzyakov et al (2009), biochar decomposition rates increase as long as easily degradable C-rich substrate is available. Additionally, Nguyen et al (2010) reported that higher temperature increased biochar oxidation and thus decomposition. However, these effects are much lower for biochar than for compost feedstock.…”

Section: Effect Of Process (Mixing Composting Fermentation)mentioning

confidence: 99%