Temporal changes in global soil respiration since 1987

Lei, Jiesi; Guo, Xue; Zeng, Yufei; Zhou, Jizhong; Gao, Qun; Yang, Yunfeng

doi:10.1038/s41467-020-20616-z

Cited by 68 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since root respiration is more sensitive to temperature changes, Ra is likely to have a stronger showing a shifting balance between autotrophic and heterotrophic respiration. Ra, however, has remained unchanged over this period (Lei et al 2021), and it is therefore important to understand the relationships between Ra, Rh, and Rs as we study the soil carbon cycling in a changing environment. Also important is that the proportion of plant roots (and therefore Ra:Rs) scales with the successional stage of an ecosystem, implying that the age of the stand will also influence the respiration partitioning and hence the overall Q 10 patterns (Wang et al 2010).…”

Section: Heterotrophic Soil Respiration Was Comparable Between Field ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon flux estimates are sensitive to data source: a comparison of field and lab temperature sensitivity data

Patel

Bond‐Lamberty

Morris

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large literature exists on mechanisms driving soil production of the greenhouse gases CO2 and CH4. Although it is common knowledge that measurements obtained through field studies vs. laboratory incubations can diverge because of the vastly different conditions of these environments, few studies have systematically examined these patterns. These data are used to parametrize and benchmark ecosystem- to global-scale models, which are then susceptible to the biases of the source data. Here, we examine how greenhouse gas measurements may be influenced by whether the measurement/incubation was conducted in the field vs. laboratory, focusing on CO2 and CH4 measurements. We use Q10 of greenhouse gas flux (temperature sensitivity) for our analyses because this metric is commonly used in biological and Earth system sciences and is an important parameter in many modeling frameworks. We predicted that laboratory measurements would be less variable, but also less representative of true field conditions. However, there was greater variability in the Q10 values calculated from lab-based measurements of CO2 fluxes, because lab experiments explore extremes rarely seen in situ, and reflect the physical and chemical disturbances occurring during sampling, transport, and incubation. Overall, respiration Q10 values were significantly greater in laboratory incubations (mean = 4.19) than field measurements (mean = 3.05), with strong influences of incubation temperature and climate region/biome. However, this was in part because field measurements typically represent total respiration (Rs), whereas lab incubations typically represent heterotrophic respiration (Rh), making direct comparisons difficult to interpret. Focusing only on Rh-derived Q10, these values showed almost identical distributions across laboratory (n = 1110) and field (n = 581) experiments, providing strong support for using the former as an experimental proxy for the latter, although we caution that geographic biases in the extant data make this conclusion tentative. Due to a smaller sample size of CH4 Q10 data, we were unable to perform a comparable robust analysis, but we expect similar interactions with soil temperature, moisture, and environmental/climatic variables. Our results here suggest the need for more concerted efforts to document and standardize these data, including sample and site metadata.

show abstract

Section: Heterotrophic Soil Respiration Was Comparable Between Field ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon flux estimates are sensitive to data source: a comparison of field and lab temperature sensitivity data

Patel

Bond‐Lamberty

Morris

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rs is often used as an indicator to evaluate soil biological activity, soil fertility, and even air permeability [2]. As the only output channel of the soil carbon pool and an important source of atmospheric CO 2 , Rs flux has become a major research hotspot [3,4]. Although Rs is a critical part of the carbon cycle, the current understanding of Rs is relatively poor, and knowledge on the influencing factors of Rs and the variability of Rs among ecosystems remains limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Scale Effects of Soil Respiration in Arid Desert Tugai Forest: Responses to Plant Functional Traits and Soil Abiotic Factors

Wang

et al. 2022

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the spatial variation law of soil respiration (Rs) and its influencing factors is very important when simulating and predicting the terrestrial carbon cycle process. However, there are still limitations in understanding how different sampling scales affect the spatial heterogeneity of Rs and whether the spatial scale effect will change with habitat types. Our objectives were to explore the effects of different sampling scales on the spatial variability of Rs and the relative importance of soil abiotic characteristics and plant traits in influencing the spatial variability of Rs. The Rs, soil properties, and plant traits were measured through field investigation and indoor analysis in the Tugai forest desert plant community in the Ebinur Lake Basin in northwest China. The Rs showed significant water gradient changes, with a coefficient of variation of 35.4%–58%. Plot types had significant effects on Rs, while the change of sampling scale did not lead to significant differences in Rs. At the plot scale, Rs spatial variation at the 5 m × 5 m sampling scale mainly depended on plant traits (leaf length, leaf thickness, leaf dry matter content, and leaf phosphorus content, p < 0.05), while Rs spatial variation at the 10 m × 10 m scale mainly depended on soil properties (soil total phosphorus, ammonium nitrogen, soil water content, and pH, p < 0.05). At the local scale, soil nutrients (soil available phosphorus and ammonium nitrogen) and plant traits (maximum plant height, leaf length, and phosphorus content) at the 5 m × 5 m scale jointly explained 49% of the spatial change of Rs. In contrast, soil microclimate (soil water content), soil nutrients (soil pH, available phosphorus, and nitrate nitrogen), and plant traits (leaf thickness) jointly explained 51% of the spatial variation of Rs at the 10 m × 10 m scale. These results demonstrate the potential to predict the spatial variability of Rs based on the combination of easily measured aboveground functional traits and soil properties, which provides new ideas and perspectives for further understanding the mechanism of Rs change in Tugai forests.

show abstract

“…Plants, via photosynthesis, are removing atmospheric CO 2 , incorporating carbon into their tissue and, after plant extinction, during the organic matter decomposition, carbon is released back into the atmosphere via plant roots and soil microorganism's respiration, i.e., soil respiration. Soil respiration in agroecosystems represents one of the significant sources of soil CO 2 emissions to the atmosphere [3,4]. The key factors affecting soil respiration include soil physical properties (such as texture or porosity) [5][6][7], soil chemical properties (such as SOC content or inorganic phosphorus) [6,8], soil biological properties (such as soil microorganisms community) [6,7], land use types (such as annual and perennial croplands or grasslands) [6,9,10], vegetation types (such as forage or cereal crops) [11][12][13], climate patterns, i.e., soil microclimate elements (such as soil temperature and soil moisture) [12,14], as well as agrotechnical measures (such as tillage or fertilization) [3,6,[15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of Winter Wheat and Barley Cultivars to Climate Change via Soil Respiration in Continental Croatia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by the cultivation of cultivars with lower carbon footprint. Considering the hypothesis that there are differences in soil respiration, due to differences in physiological and morphological characteristics of wheat and barley, the aim of this study is an assessment of soil respiration rates and microclimate under different cover (bare soil, wheat, and barley) and cultivar (four barley and four wheat) types. Soil respiration was determined by in situ closed static-chamber method in continental Croatia, during the 2020/2021 season. The seasonal pattern of the soil respiration was similar for all cultivars, respiration was increasing with crop development stages until maturity, when it decreased until the harvest. Cover type did not have influence on soil microclimate but did have on soil respiration. Bare soil had significantly lower annual respiration rates, compared to the barley/wheat covers. Average annual respiration rates were similar between the barley and wheat covers, as well as between all studied barley cultivars. A significant difference between winter wheat cultivars have only been determined between the Renata (9.78 kg C-CO2 ha−1 day−1) and El Nino (12.67 kg C-CO2 ha−1 day−1) cultivars. However, the determination of the total carbon budget is needed, in order to determine the most suitable cultivar, in the light of climate change.

show abstract

Temporal changes in global soil respiration since 1987

Cited by 68 publications

References 52 publications

Carbon flux estimates are sensitive to data source: a comparison of field and lab temperature sensitivity data

Carbon flux estimates are sensitive to data source: a comparison of field and lab temperature sensitivity data

Spatial Scale Effects of Soil Respiration in Arid Desert Tugai Forest: Responses to Plant Functional Traits and Soil Abiotic Factors

Contribution of Winter Wheat and Barley Cultivars to Climate Change via Soil Respiration in Continental Croatia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About