4.7 Article

Seasonal and diurnal variations in topsoil and subsoil respiration under snowpack in a temperate deciduous forest

Journal

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2004GB002259

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We measured soil CO2 concentration at half-hour intervals with infrared gas analyzers buried in soil at four depths throughout the snow cover season extending from early December to early April in a deciduous temperate forest. We evaluated soil CO2 efflux or total soil respiration, topsoil (the A-horizon) respiration, and subsoil (the C-horizon) respiration using a modified flux gradient method. Thereby, we investigated seasonal and diurnal variations in these soil respirations under snowpack. Soil CO2 concentration and soil respiration changed dynamically under the condition of constant soil temperature. Topsoil respiration decreased rapidly in late autumn and relatively constant until mid-winter, whereas it increased in late winter when snowmelt progressed. On the other hand, subsoil respiration decreased gradually until mid-winter and increased slightly in late winter. Both topsoil and subsoil respirations showed similar diurnal variations with a peak in early or mid-afternoon, respectively, independently of soil temperature. These seasonal and diurnal variations in soil respiration were inferred to result from the supply of labile carbon compounds, which were respiratory substrates for microorganisms, into soil from litter with meltwater. The seasonal sum of topsoil, subsoil, and total respirations for the snow cover period of 4 months were 21.4, 48.0, and 69.4 gC m(-2), respectively; these accounted for 3.0, 27.3, and 7.7% of the annual sum, respectively. The ratio of topsoil respiration to total soil respiration was 0.31 on average during the snow period, which was considerably lower than that in the summer season.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available