4.8 Article

A High Arctic soil ecosystem resists long-term environmental manipulations

Journal

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 10, Pages 3187-3194

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02431.x

Keywords

arctic tundra plant community; carbon dioxide; GHG flux; methane; nitrogen cycling; nitrous oxide; soil microbial community

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. NSERC
  3. Canadian International Polar Year (IPY) program
  4. ArcticNet NCE

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We evaluated above- and belowground ecosystem changes in a 16 year, combined fertilization and warming experiment in a High Arctic tundra deciduous shrub heath (Alexandra Fiord, Ellesmere Island, NU, Canada). Soil emissions of the three key greenhouse gases (GHGs) (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were measured in mid-July 2009 using soil respiration chambers attached to a FTIR system. Soil chemical and biochemical properties including Q(10) values for CO2, CH4, and N2O, Bacteria and Archaea assemblage composition, and the diversity and prevalence of key nitrogen cycling genes including bacterial amoA, crenarchaeal amoA, and nosZ were measured. Warming and fertilization caused strong increases in plant community cover and height but had limited effects on GHG fluxes and no substantial effect on soil chemistry or biochemistry. Similarly, there was a surprising lack of directional shifts in the soil microbial community as a whole or any change at all in microbial functional groups associated with CH4 consumption or N2O cycling in any treatment. Thus, it appears that while warming and increased nutrient availability have strongly affected the plant community over the last 16 years, the belowground ecosystem has not yet responded. This resistance of the soil ecosystem has resulted in limited changes in GHG fluxes in response to the experimental treatments.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available