Full Soil Respiration and The Environment 1st Edition Yiqi Luo Ebook All Chapters
Full Soil Respiration and The Environment 1st Edition Yiqi Luo Ebook All Chapters
Full Soil Respiration and The Environment 1st Edition Yiqi Luo Ebook All Chapters
com
https://ebookname.com/product/soil-respiration-and-the-
environment-1st-edition-yiqi-luo/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWNLOAD EBOOK
https://ebookname.com/product/handbook-of-soil-acidity-books-in-
soils-plants-and-the-environment-1st-edition-zdenko-rengel/
https://ebookname.com/product/photosynthesis-and-respiration-1st-
edition-william-g-hopkins/
https://ebookname.com/product/luo-proverbs-and-sayings-asenath-
bole-odaga/
https://ebookname.com/product/sequence-specific-dna-binding-
agents-1st-edition-michael-j-waring/
The Origins of Criticism Literary Culture and Poetic
Theory in Classical Greece Andrew Ford
https://ebookname.com/product/the-origins-of-criticism-literary-
culture-and-poetic-theory-in-classical-greece-andrew-ford/
https://ebookname.com/product/fighting-global-neo-extractivism-
fossil-free-social-movements-in-south-africa-1st-edition-jasper-
finkeldey/
https://ebookname.com/product/advances-in-fluid-mechanics-vi-m-
rahman/
https://ebookname.com/product/cnet-do-it-yourself-camera-and-
music-phone-projects-24-cool-things-you-didn-t-know-you-could-
do-1st-edition-ari-hakkarainen/
https://ebookname.com/product/the-case-for-the-enlightenment-
scotland-and-naples-1680-1760-ideas-in-context-1st-edition-john-
robertson/
From Timbuktu to Katrina Sources in African American
History Volume 1 1st Edition Quintard Taylor
https://ebookname.com/product/from-timbuktu-to-katrina-sources-
in-african-american-history-volume-1-1st-edition-quintard-taylor/
Soil Respiration and the Environment
This page intentionally left blank
Soil Respiration and
the Environment
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department
in Oxford, UK: phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, E-mail: permissions@
elsevier.com. You may also complete your request on-line via the Elsevier homepage (http://
elsevier.com), by selecting “Support & Contact” then “Copyright and Permission” and then
“Obtaining Permissions.”
Part I Context 1
Part II Mechanisms 33
5. Controlling Factors 79
5.1. Substrate supply and ecosystem productivity 79
5.2. Temperature 85
5.3. Soil moisture 92
5.4. Soil oxygen 98
5.5. Nitrogen 99
5.6. Soil texture 101
5.7. Soil pH 102
5.8. Interactions of multiple factors 104
Appendix 247
References 257
Index 307
Preface
The active research in the past decade has substantially advanced our
understanding but, meanwhile, created much confusion with considerable
repetitive work in the research community. Much of the confusion and repeti-
tion stems from the lack of a systematic organization of knowledge on
fundamental processes of soil respiration. It was our initial motivation to lay
down the foundation of the soil respiration sciences and to clarify some of
the confusion. Toward that goal, we make an attempt to progressively intro-
duce and rigorously define concepts and basic processes. We also try to
structure the book in such a way that all the major up-to-dated research
findings can be logically summarized. The book is accordingly divided into
four sections—context, mechanisms, regulation, and approaches—and ten
chapters. Chapters 1 and 2 offer a contextual view of the soil respiration
science and lay down its relationships with a variety of issues in carbon
research. Chapters 3 and 4 describe fundamental processes of CO2 production
and transport. Chapters 5–7 present regulatory mechanisms of soil respira-
tion, including controlling factors, spatial and temporal variations, and
responses to natural and human-made perturbations. Chapters 8—10
illustrate research approaches to measurement of soil respiration, partition-
ing to various components, and modeling. It is our hope that this book helps
clarify confusion and identify knowledge gaps where research may be most
productive.
We write the book for undergraduate and graduate students, professors
and researchers in areas of ecology, soil science, biogeochemistry, earth
system science, atmosphere, climate molders, microbiology, agronomy, plant
physiology, global change biology, and environmental sciences. The book
introduces concepts and processes in a logical way so that students and
laymen who do not have much background in this area are can read the book
without too much difficulty. The book has also summarized the contempo-
rary research findings with extensive references. Scientists who are actively
working on soil respiration should find this book as a useful reference book
for their research. We also recognize that the field of soil respiration research
is evolving very quickly. Even within the time span from the manuscript
submission to the publication of this book, many important papers have been
published. Inevitably, many good papers may have been left out. We are sorry
if we miss your work in this book but welcome you to write us emails and
send us the postal mails with your important publications. We will try our
best to incorporate your work into the new version of the book in the
future.
This book is first dedicated to our fellow researchers. Their devotion to
and passionate on the soil respiration science are the impetus of advances in
our understanding on this subject. Their imagination and creativity result in,
for example, diverse ideas, experimental evidence from different angles, and
Preface xi
measurements by distinct methods. Their rigorous logic helps critique results,
identify new issues to be addressed, and generate new ideas to be tested. Their
meticulous methodology checks measurement and modeling results once and
again, enhancing the robustness of our knowledge. Their collective effort
helps establish the soil respiration science and, more importantly, bring it
into a focal research area in the earth system science. We hope that this book
will stimulate further interest in this fascinating subject and promote high-
quality scientific contribution.
We also dedicate this book to our families. Our parents taught us to work
hard no matter what we are doing, which becomes the lifetime gift to us. The
hardship of lives in our childhoods makes us appreciate what we have every-
day. We thank our spouses for their understanding of our career choices and
for their support to our effort on book writing. They have sacrificed countless
hours of family activities to make time for us to work on the book. Our chil-
dren brought us tremendous fun to our busy lives. In particular, Jessica Y.
Luo has read the first two chapters and offered suggestions to improve reader-
ship of the book.
Yiqi Luo is also grateful for students and post-doctoral fellows in his labo-
ratory who have worked with him to develop ideas, test various hypotheses,
and contribute to discussion in the research community via publications and
participation in international meetings.
Finally, we are indebted to many colleagues and authors who have sent us
reprints of their papers and manuscripts. We are grateful to Eric A. Davidson,
Joseph M. Craine, Dafeng Hui, Changhui Peng, Weixing Cheng, and Kiona
Ogle for their time to read the manuscript and for many helpful suggestions
and criticisms they have offered. We also thank Kelly D. Sonnack and Meg
Day of Academic Press/Elsevier for their patience and encouragement for this
project, Cate Barr for providing a cover design and Deborah Fogel for help in
editing manuscripts. Yiqi Luo thanks Dr. Lars Hedin for hosting his sabbati-
cal leave at Princeton University where the manuscript was finalized. Yiqi
Luo also acknowledges the financial support from US Department of Energy
and National Science Foundation, which has helped maintain his active
research in the past decade.
Context
This page intentionally left blank
CHAPTER 1
Introduction and Overview
Soil respiration is a crucial piece of the puzzle that is the earth’s system. To
understand how the earth’s system functions, we need to figure out the role
that soil respiration plays in regulating atmospheric CO2 concentration and
climate dynamics. Will global warming instigate a positive feedback loop
between the global carbon cycle and climate system that would, in turn,
aggravate climatic warming? How critical is soil respiration in regulating this
positive feedback? To answer these questions, we have to understand the
processes involved in soil respiration, examine how these processes respond
to environmental change, and account for their spatial and temporal
variability.
Since climate change is one of the main challenges facing humanity, quan-
tification of soil respiration is no longer just a tedious academic issue. It is
also relevant to farmers, foresters, and government officials. Can respiratory
carbon emission and/or photosynthetic carbon uptake be manipulated to
maximize carbon storage so that farmers and foresters can earn cash awards
in global carbon-trading markets? To effectively manipulate respiratory
carbon emission from terrestrial ecosystems, we need to identify the major
factors that control soil respiration. Even if we can manipulate respiratory
processes, how could signatory countries to the Kyoto treaty verify carbon
sinks in the biosphere to claim their credits during the intergovernmental
negotiations? All these issues make it necessary for us to invent reliable
methods to measure soil respiration accurately in croplands, forest areas, and
other regions. Can the managed carbon sinks last long enough to mitigate
greenhouse gas emission effectively in the future? How will soil respiration
respond to natural and human-made perturbations? To answer all these ques-
tions, it is necessary to develop a predictive understanding of soil respiration,
aiming toward a mechanistic modeling of soil respiration. It is evident from
all these examples that studying soil respiration is not only desirable for
3
4 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview
200
Number of papers published on soil respiration
150
100
50
0
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Years
FIGURE 1.1 Number of papers published on soil respiration since 1985. The number was
obtained from a search for the key terms “soil respiration,” “soil CO2 efflux”, and “belowground
respiration” in the Web of Science database.
purely academic reasons but also crucial in the commercial and political
arenas.
Due to the recent societal need to mitigate climate change and the scientific
aspiration to understand soil respiration itself, the research community has
been very active in studying soil respiration. During the past 15 years, the
number of papers published on soil respiration has linearly increased and
reached nearly 200 papers in 2003–2004, compared with about 10 papers in
1985–1990 (Fig. 1.1). The active research also partially reflects the fact that
soil respiration remains least understood among ecosystem carbon processes,
despite its central role in the global carbon cycle and climate change. This
book lays down the fundamentals of soil respiration while synthesizing the
recent literature in this field.
The word respiration, derived from the Latin prefi x re- (back, again) and root
word spirare (to breathe), literally means breathing again and again. It is thus
used to describe the process of gas exchange between organism and environ-
ment. Physiologically, respiration is a series of metabolic processes that break
down (or catabolize) organic molecules to liberate energy, water, and carbon
Definition and Introduction 5
dioxide (CO2) in a cell. All living organisms—plants, animals, and micro-
organisms alike—share similar pathways of respiration to obtain the energy
that fuels life while releasing CO2. Respiration is often studied in relation to
energy supply at the biochemical and cellular levels as a major component of
bioenergetics. However, bioenergetics in soils is not well developed (Dilly
2005), and soil respiration is studied predominantly in relation to CO2 and
O2 exchanges. In this book the word respiration is used mainly to describe
CO2 production rather than energy supply.
For the purposes of this book, soil respiration is defined as the production
of carbon dioxide by organisms and the plant parts in soil. These organisms
are soil microbes and fauna, and the plant parts are roots and rhizomes in
the soil. Additionally, soil is often defined as a mixture of dead organic matter,
air, water, and weathered rock that supports plant growth (Buscot 2005).
Some authors (e.g., Killham 1994) also include living organisms in the defini-
tion of soil, treating roots, soil microbes, and soil fauna as part of soil. There-
fore, it makes sense to talk about soil that can breathe. Soil respiration means
that the living biomass of soil respires CO2, while soil organisms gain energy
from catabolizing organic matter to support life.
Soil respiration is sometimes called belowground respiration, in contrast
with aboveground respiration. The latter refers to respiratory CO2 production
by the plant parts above the soil surface. Although the definition of soil usually
does not include dead plant materials at the soil surface that have not been
well decomposed, CO2 production via litter decomposition in the litter layers
is generally included in soil respiration (or belowground respiration) in many
publications and, for the sake of simplicity, in this book as well.
Technically, the rate of CO2 production in the soil (i.e., the soil respiration
rate) cannot be directly measured in the field. Measurements are often made
at the soil surface to quantify a rate of CO2 efflux from the soil to the atmos-
phere. The instantaneous rate of soil CO2 efflux is controlled not only by the
rate of soil respiration but also by the transport of CO2 along the soil profile
and at the soil surface (see Chapter 4). The CO2 transport is influenced by
the strength of the CO2 concentration gradient between the soil and the
atmosphere, soil porosity, wind speed, and other factors. At a steady state,
the CO2 efflux rate at the soil surface equals the rate of CO2 production in
soil. In this case, soil CO2 efflux is practically equivalent to soil respiration,
and the two terms are thus interchangeable.
However, there are several situations in which CO2 production may not be
at a steady state with CO2 transport. For example, soil degassing occurs
during rainfall or irrigation, driving CO2 stored in the soil air space out of
the soil. After rainfall or irrigation, CO2 produced by soil organisms is par-
tially stored in the soil to rebuild the CO2 concentration gradient. Carbonic
acid reaction and microbial methanogensis could each produce or consume
6 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
FIGURE 1.2 Measured rate of soil CO2 efflux in a tallgrass prairie of Oklahoma, USA from
1999 to 2005. Open circles represent data points, and bars indicate the one standard error
below and above the data points. Data are only for the measured soil CO2 efflux in the control
treatment in a warming and clipping experiment and adopted from Luo et al. (2001), Wan
et al. (2005), and Zhou et al. (2006).
From the observed soil respiration patterns, we can ask many questions.
For example, what causes such seasonal and interannual variations? Why
does soil respiration vary from one site to another? How can we scale up the
plot-level measurements to estimate total carbon losses on regional and global
scales? Can we derive general mechanisms from the observed patterns and
then predict future changes in soil respiration? What percentage of the lost
carbon is from root respiration? How much is the carbon released by soil
respiration directly from the recent photosynthesis? This book will address
these questions, among others, as it lays down the basic principles of soil
respiration. Before turning to these issues, however, let’s first review the
history of research on soil respiration.
Research on soil respiration has an impressively long history (Fig. 1.3) and
can be dated back to papers by Wollny (1831), Boussingault and Levy (1853),
and Möller (1879). The earliest studies of soil respiration were intended to
characterize soil metabolism. Twentieth-century research on soil respiration
8 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview
can be divided into roughly four major periods. During the first few decades
of the century, research on soil respiration was conducted primarily in the
laboratory with agricultural soil. Soil respiration was used to evaluate soil
fertility and biological activities in soil. Chemical fertilizers, invented in the
late 19th century, were applied to crops to stimulate growth and considerably
enhanced agricultural productivity as a result. At that time, researchers
emphasized understanding the soil properties that influence crop production.
Soil respiration was used as an index of soil fertility for agricultural produc-
tion (Russell and Appleyard 1915), because in a field study, fertilization of
agricultural crops generally increases soil respiration rates (Lundegårdh
1927). Some laboratory studies, however, showed that nutrient release was
not proportional to the carbon release during mineralization (Waksman and
Starkey 1924, Pinck et al. 1950).
During that period, some primitive methods for the measurement of soil
respiration were developed. Stoklasa and Ernest (1905) passed CO2-free air
over soil samples contained in a flask and measured the amount of CO2
released from the soil samples using the alkali absorption method.
Lundegårdh (1927) recognized that measured CO2 efflux from soil samples
in the laboratory might not be representative of that from intact soils in the
field, where, he argued, diffusion was a chief process controlling efflux of
CO2. He was probably the first scientist to make in situ measurements of rates
of CO2 efflux from field soil by covering the soil surface with a chamber for
a period of time. Then he took air samples with brass tubes from the chamber,
as well as from air spaces in the soil at three different depths. The air samples
were passed through alkali solutions for measurements of soil respiration.
Humfeld (1930) modified Lundegårdh’s method and passed air through the
chamber with inlet and outlet ports to collect the CO2-enriched air in an
alkali absorption train. The alkali absorption chamber method, first intro-
duced by Lundegårdh (1921), modified by Humfeld (1930) and others, and
widely used in the following decades, places static alkali solution within the
chamber followed by titration of chloric acid.
By this time the major factors that influence soil respiration had been
identified. Greaves and Carter (1920) were among the first to document a
consistent relationship between soil water content and microbial activity.
Turpin (1920) reviewed soil respiration and concluded that the primary
source of CO2 efflux from soils was attributable to bacterial decomposition.
Lundegårdh (1927) pointed out that soil diffusion was important in control-
ling the efflux of CO2. Smith and Brown (1933) indicated that the rate of dif-
fusion of CO2 through the soil correlated with CO2 production. Lebedjantzev
(1924) observed that air drying of soil samples increased fertility (such as
NH4-N, amide-N, and phosphorus) of a variety of soils and decreased the
number of microorganisms in pot experiments.
History of Research 9
Few publications on soil respiration can be identified during the relatively
inactive research period from the late 1930s to the early 1950s, possibly due
to the worldwide social turbulence of that period. From the late 1950s to the
1970s, research activity on soil respiration resumed (Fig. 1.3), mainly from
an ecological perspective, as scientists tried to understand heterotrophic
processes in the soils of native ecosystems (Lieth and Ouellette 1962, Witkamp
1966, Raguotis 1967, Schulze 1967, Reiners 1968, Kucera and Kirkham 1971).
During that period, research advanced the science of soil respiration in many
respects, including (1) methods of measurement, (2) controlling factors, (3)
partitioning into components, (4) relationships with other ecosystem carbon
processes, and (5) synthesis and scaling to global estimation.
Many studies were devoted to careful evaluation of the various factors that
affect the accuracy of the alkali absorption method (Walter 1952, Howard
1966, Kirita and Hozumi 1966, Kirita 1971, Chapman 1971, 1979, Anderson
1973, Gupta and Singh 1977). The accuracy of the method was found to vary
with factors such as the amount and strength of alkali used, the area of
covered soil, the chamber height above the ground, the depth of the chamber
inserted into soil, the surface area and the height of the alkali container
within the chamber, the duration of measurement, and the rates of soil CO2
efflux. Minderman and Vulto (1973) suggested the use of fine-grained soda
lime instead of alkali solution to absorb CO2.
Closed static chamber method with Alkali method & Gas well method
Dynamic chamber methods with IRGA
Method
Micrometeorological techniques
C trading
Issues
Climate feedback
Soil metabolism
Global C cycle
Nutrient release Annual carbon balance
Soil fertility Component partitioning
Regulatory factors: temperature & moisture
FIGURE 1.3 Schematic illustration of the history of soil respiration research since the 1830s.
Within the main axis are major themes in different eras of research. There is little research
activity from late 1930s to early 1950s. Above the axis is method development for measurement
of soil respiration. Below the axis are major issues that have been addressed by and/or motivate
soil respiration research during the different eras.
10 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview
One major technical advance was made in the 1950s: infrared gas analyzer
(IRGA) was used for the measurement of soil respiration. Haber (1958) first
used IRGA to calibrate the alkali absorption method. Golley et al. (1962) were
among the first to make field measurements of soil respiration on the peat
floor of a mangrove forest using IRGA. Reiners (1968) examined how gas flow
rates influenced IRGA measurement of CO2 evolution, while Kanemasu et al.
(1974) studied effects of air “suction” and “pressure” on IRGA measurements
of soil respiration. Measured CO2 efflux with the suction chamber was one
order of magnitude higher than with the pressure chamber. The suction
chamber drew CO2 from the soil outside the chamber and/or in deep layers
via mass flow. Edwards and Solins (1973) designed an open flow system with
the chamber linked to IRGA to measure soil respiration continuously. Edwards
(1974) used movable chambers that were lowered onto the forest floor during
measurements and lifted between measurements. The movable chambers
allowed natural drying of the soil and litterfall onto the measurement surface.
The IRGA measurements of soil CO2 efflux were then compared with those
using the alkali absorption method (Kirita and Hozumi 1966). Many studies
found that the alkali method underestimated soil CO2 efflux compared with
the IRGA measurements (Haber 1958, Witkamp 1966, Kucera and Kirkham
1971). Other studies did not detect any significant differences between the
two methods (e.g., Ino and Monsi 1969).
The gas-well method first used by Lundegårdh (1927) to estimate soil
respiration from a CO2 concentration gradient along soil profiles was fully
developed by de Jong et al. (1979). Meanwhile, a variety of micrometeorologi-
cal methods, such as Bowen ratio and eddy flux, have been developed to
measure gas exchanges within and above the plant canopy (Monteith 1962,
Monteith et al. 1964), from which soil respiration was indirectly estimated.
From the late 1950s to the 1970s, knowledge of factors that regulate soil
respiration was greatly enriched. Bunt and Rovira (1954) studied soil respira-
tion in a temperature range of 10 to 70°C. They found that O2 uptake and
CO2 release increased with temperature up to 50°C, above which it declined.
Many studies demonstrated that soil respiration correlated exponentially
with temperature (Wiant 1967, Kucera and Kirkhma 1971, Medina and Zelwer
1972). Drobnik (1962) estimated Q10, that is, a quotient indicating the tem-
perature sensitivity of soil respiration (see Chapter 5), to be 1.6 to 2.0 in
response to temperatures ranging from 8 to 28°C. Wiant (1967) estimated
Q10 to be approximately 2 for temperatures from 20 to 40°C. Soil moisture
was also identified as important in influencing soil respiration. A laboratory
study suggested that microbial respiration decreased when soil moisture was
below 40% or above 80% of the field-holding capacity (Ino and Monsi 1969).
Soil temperature and moisture combined could account for up to 90% of the
variation of soil respiration measured in the field (Reiners 1968).
History of Research 11
Birch and his colleague (Birch and Friend 1956, Birch 1958) conducted a
notable study demonstrating that when a soil was dried and rewetted, decom-
position of its organic matter was enhanced, leading to a flush of CO2 produc-
tion. They explained that the drying-wetting effect was not related to microbial
stimulation or microbial death but rather caused by liberation of rapidly
decomposable material from the clay. The clay protected the organic materials
from microbial attacks under consistently moist conditions.
During that period, components of soil respiration were clearly identified
into two major categories: autotrophic and heterotrophic respiration. The
autotrophic components are the metabolic respiration of live root, associated
mycorrhiza, and symbiotic N fi xing nodules. The heterotrophic respiration
is from microbial decomposition of root exudates in rhizosphere, above-
ground and belowground litter, and soil organic matter (SOM). Coleman
(1973b) measured total respiration of intact soil cores and individual compo-
nents of roots, litter, and soil. Contribution to the total soil respiration was
8 to 17% from roots, 6 to 16% from litter, and 67 to 80% from soil microbes
in a successional grassland. Edwards and Sollins (1973) partitioned total soil
respiration from a forest into 35% from roots, 48% from litter, and 17% from
soil. Richards (1974) found it difficult to partition soil respiration among dif-
ferent soil fauna, fungi, and bacteria.
Field measurements over the whole growing seasons made it possible to
scale up individual measurements to estimate annual carbon efflux. Kucera
and Kirkham (1971) estimated annual soil CO2 efflux to be 452 g C m−2 yr−1 in
a tallgrass prairie by applying a temperature-respiration regression to continu-
ous temperature records. Coleman (1973a) scaled up monthly averages of soil
respiration in a grassland and estimated annual soil CO2 efflux to be 357 to
421 g C m−2 yr−1. Estimated annual soil CO2 releases were about 1000 g C m−2 yr−1
in many forests (Edwards and Sollins 1973, Garrett and Cox 1973).
Estimated annual efflux from soil respiration was often compared with
annual carbon influx via aboveground litterfall, although the two processes
are not completely comparable. Reiners (1968) showed that total soil respira-
tory carbon release was three times higher than litter carbon input. Edwards
and Sollins (1973) found that litter decomposition accounted for only one-
fifth of annual soil respiration. Anderson (1973) showed that annual soil
respiration released 2.5 times as much carbon in annual litterfall. However,
several studies demonstrated that carbon released by soil respiration was
equivalent to that input from litterfall (Colemen 1973a, Witkamp and Frank
1969).
The accumulation of studies during that period offered opportunities to
synthesize and compile results from many ecosystems. Singh and Gupta
(1977) produced a major synthesis on the carbon processes of litter decom-
position, soil respiration, root respiration, microbial respiration, faunal
12 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview
Soil respiration is a subject that is of concern not only to ecologists but also
to scientists who study atmospheric dynamics and earth system functioning.
As an integral part of the ecosystem carbon cycle, soil respiration is related
to various components of ecosystem production. Soil respiration is also
intimately associated with nutrient processes such as decomposition and
mineralization. Moreover, soil respiration plays a critical role in regulating
atmospheric CO2 concentration and climate dynamics in the earth system.
Thus, it becomes relevant to the mitigation of climate change and the imple-
mentation of international climate treaties in terms of carbon storage and
trading. This chapter relates soil respiration to ecosystem carbon balance
and production, nutrient cycling, regional and global carbon cycling, climate
change, and carbon storage and trading.
The carbon cycle in an ecosystem usually initiates when plants fix CO2 from
the air and convert it to organic carbon compounds through photosynthesis
(Fig. 2.1). Some of the organic carbon compounds are used to grow plant
tissues. Some are broken down to supply the plants with energy. During this
17
18 Chapter 2 Importance and Roles of Soil Respiration
CO2 NEE
Photosynthesis Ecosystom respiration Re
GPP
Ra Soil respiration Rs
Rm
Rb
Root SOM Litter Decomposition
Rp=Ra–Rb
Leaching losses
NPP=GPP-Rp
FIGURE 2.1 Schematic diagram of ecosystem carbon processes. Abbreviation see text.
process, CO2 is released back into the atmosphere through plant respiration.
The grown tissues include leaves, stems (e.g., wood for trees), and roots.
Leaves and fine roots usually live for several months up to a few years before
death, whereas woody tissues may grow for hundreds of years in forests. Dead
plant materials (i.e., litter) are decomposed by microorganisms to provide
energy for microbial biomass growth and other activities. At the same time,
CO2 is released back into the atmosphere through microbial respiration. The
live microbial biomass is mixed with organic residuals of dead plants and
dead microbes to form soil organic matter (SOM). SOM can store carbon in
soil for hundreds and thousands of years before it is broken down to CO2
through respiration by microbes.
Through the carbon cycle, CO2 is produced by both plant respiration (Rp)
and microbial respiration (Rm) that occurs during decomposition of litter and
SOM. Rp is often called autotrophic respiration and can be separated into
aboveground plant respiration (Ra) and belowground plant respiration (Rb).
(The belowground plant respiration is often equivalent to root respiration.)
Microbial respiration (Rm) during the decomposition of litter and SOM is
called heterotrophic respiration. The efflux rate measured at the soil surface
(Rs) is the sum of root respiration and microbial respiration:
R s = R b + Rm (2.1)
The CO2 efflux measured at the soil surface can be considered as soil
respiration when CO2 production and transport are at a steady state (see
Soil Respiration and Ecosystem Carbon Balance 19
Chapter 1). Thus, ecosystem respiration (Re), the total CO2 emission from an
ecosystem, can be estimated by:
Re = R a + R s (2.2)
The relationship of Rs with Re, as seen in equation 2.2, is well illustrated
by data collected from an aspen-dominated mixed hardwood forest in
Michigan from 1999 to 2003 (Curtis et al. 2005). On average, over the five
years Rs accounts for 71% of Re, while leaves and aboveground live wood
combined (Ra) contribute the rest of Re (Table 2.1). The relative contribution
of Rs to Re varies considerably in a year. Rs contributes nearly 100% of Re for
most of the winter; the contribution drops to about 60% during the period
of fast leaf expansion and then gradually increases during the growing season
as soil warms, reaching about 75% at the time of leaf abscission in the autumn
(Curtis et al. 2005). Typically, Rs contributes 30–80% of Re in forests.
Soil respiration is not only an important component of ecosystem respira-
tion but also closely related to ecosystem production such as gross primary
production (GPP), net primary production (NPP), and net ecosystem produc-
tion (NEP). GPP is annual carbon assimilation by photosynthesis ignoring
photorespiration. In the Michigan forest, for example, soil respiration is
approximately 63% of GPP (Table 2.1). NEP is GPP minus Re and also related
to soil respiration by:
NEP = GPP − Ra − Rs (2.3a)
or Rs is related to NEP though NPP, which is GPP minus autotrophic plant
respiration, by:
NEP = NPP − Rm
(2.3b)
= NPP + Rb − Rs
TABLE 2.1 Various components of ecosystem carbon fluxes in a mixed hardwood forest
from 1999 to 2003
Note: GPP was estimated by a biometrical approach that sums up different components. The
biometrically estimated GPP was higher than that estimated by eddy-flux measurements by
nearly 30%. Units are g C m−2 yr−2. Modified with permission from New Phytologist: Curtis
et al. (2005)
20 Chapter 2 Importance and Roles of Soil Respiration
2000
1800
Soil respiration (g C m-2 yr-1)
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Fertilized and
Component Control Irrigated Fertilized Irrigated
Note: Units are g C m−2 yr−1. Modified with permission from Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Maier and Kress (2000).
from aboveground litter. Indeed, soil respiration releases carbon from sources
of root litter, root exudates, and root respiration in addition to the above-
ground litterfall. The correlation was poor, however, among years at a single
site (Davidson et al. 2002a).
The relationships of Rs with other fluxes can also be used to examine
responses of an ecosystem to perturbations. Table 2.2, for example, presents
annual carbon fluxes in mid-rotation loblolly pine plantations as affected by
fertilization and irrigation (Maier and Kress 2000). Annual Rs is mainly
affected by irrigation, ranging from 1263 to 1576 g C m−2 yr−1 among the four
treatments. Belowground root respiration (Rb) is much more responsive to
fertilization than to irrigation, whereas Rm is considerably depressed by fer-
tilization. As a consequence, the relative contribution of Rb to Rs increases
from 52% under control to 73% under fertilization. Fertilization substantially
increased NPP, resulting in net carbon storage in the forest. NEP is negative
by 100 g C m−2 yr−1 without fertilization and becomes positive to 700 g C m−2 yr−1
with fertilization (Table 2.2).
... unserm Umkreis gibt’s dermaßen große Schweine, das jedes, ...
... unserm Umkreis gibt’s dermaßen große Schweine, daß jedes, ...
... Jeremejewna. Erzürne doch den Onkel nicht! Sie nur, ...
... Jeremejewna. Erzürne doch den Onkel nicht! Sieh nur, ...
... Mitrofan (den Onkel nachrufend). Packe dich, Onkel, hol’ dich ...
... Mitrofan (dem Onkel nachrufend). Packe dich, Onkel, hol’ dich ...
... Milon. Wie verdienst du dir denn dein Brot. ...
... Milon. Wie verdienst du dir denn dein Brot? ...
... Ein Ende! ...
... ein Ende! ...
... Starodum. In einem. Mein Vater wiederholte mir bestän ...
... Starodum. In einem. Mein Vater wiederholte mir beständig ...
... ... Nun aber will ich diesen Kanaillen von Dienstboten ...
... ... Nun aber will ich es diesen Kanaillen von Dienstboten ...
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DER LANDJUNKER:
LUSTSPIEL IN FÜNF AUFZÜGEN ***
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must,
at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy,
a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy
upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.