4.7 Article

The impact of nitrogen deposition on carbon sequestration by European forests and heathlands

Journal

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 258, Issue 8, Pages 1814-1823

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.02.034

Keywords

Carbon sequestration; C/N ratios; Nitrogen; Ecosystem production; Fertilizer experiments; Deposition; Forests; Heathlands; Environmental change

Categories

Funding

  1. NitroEurope Integrated Project [017841]
  2. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010023] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we present estimated ranges in carbon (C) sequestration per kg nitrogen (N) addition in above-ground biomass and in soil organic matter for forests and heathlands, based on: (i) empirical relations between spatial patterns of carbon uptake and influencing environmental factors including nitrogen deposition (forests only), (ii) N-15 field experiments, (iii) long-term low-dose N fertilizer experiments and (iv) results from ecosystem models. The results of the various studies are in close agreement and show that above-ground accumulation of carbon in forests is generally within the range 15-40 kg C/kg N. For heathlands, a range of 5-15 kg C/kg N has been observed based on low-dose N fertilizer experiments. The uncertainty in C sequestration per kg N addition in soils is larger than for above-ground biomass and varies on average between 5 and 35 kg C/kg N for both forests and heathlands. All together these data indicate a total carbon sequestration range of 5-75 kg C/kg N deposition for forest and heathlands, with a most common range of 20-40 kg C/kg N. Results cannot be extrapolated to systems with very high N inputs, nor to other ecosystems, such as peatlands, where the impact of N is much more variable, and may range from C sequestration to C losses. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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