4.6 Article

Concurrent and lagged impacts of an anomalously warm year on autotrophic and heterotrophic components of soil respiration: a deconvolution analysis

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 187, 期 1, 页码 184-198

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03256.x

关键词

autotrophic respiration; Bayesian; deconvolution; EcoCELL; heterotrophic respiration; Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC); soil respiration; warming

资金

  1. US National Science Foundation (NSF) [DEB 0078325, DEB 0743778, DEB 0840964, DBI 0850290, ESP 0919466]
  2. Office of Science, US Department of Energy [DE-FG03-99ER62800, DE-FG02-006ER64317]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Partitioning soil respiration into autotrophic (R-A) and heterotrophic (R-H) components is critical for understanding their differential responses to climate warming. Here, we used a deconvolution analysis to partition soil respiration in a pulse warming experiment. We first conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine which parameters can be identified by soil respiration data. A Markov chain Monte Carlo technique was then used to optimize those identifiable parameters in a terrestrial ecosystem model. Finally, the optimized parameters were employed to quantify R-A and R-H in a forward analysis. Our results displayed that more than one-half of parameters were constrained by daily soil respiration data. The optimized model simulation showed that warming stimulated R-H and had little effect on R-A in the first 2 months, but decreased both R-H and R-A during the remainder of the treatment and post-treatment years. Clipping of above-ground biomass stimulated the warming effect on R-H but not on R-A. Overall, warming decreased R-A and R-H significantly, by 28.9% and 24.9%, respectively, during the treatment year and by 27.3% and 33.3%, respectively, during the post-treatment year, largely as a result of decreased canopy greenness and biomass. Lagged effects of climate anomalies on soil respiration and its components are important in assessing terrestrial carbon cycle feedbacks to climate warming.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据