4.8 Article

Decade-long soil nitrogen constraint on the CO2 fertilization of plant biomass

期刊

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
卷 3, 期 3, 页码 278-282

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1694

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Department of Energy [DOE/DE-FG02-96ER62291, DE-FC02-06ER64158]
  2. National Science Foundation [NSF Biocomplexity 0322057, NSF LTER DEB 9411972, DEB 0080382, DEB 0620652, NSF LTREB 0716587]
  3. University of Minnesota
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1234162, 1242531] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The stimulation of plant growth by elevated CO2 concentration has been widely observed. Such fertilization, and associated carbon storage, could dampen future increases in atmospheric CO2 levels and associated climate warming(1). However, the CO2 fertilization of plant biomass may be sensitive to nitrogen supply(2-4). Herein we show that in the latest decade of a long-term perennial grassland experiment, low ambient soil nitrogen availability constrained the positive response of plant biomass to elevated CO2, a result not seen in the first years (1998-2000) of the study. From 2001 to 2010, elevated CO2 stimulated plant biomass half as much under ambient as under enriched nitrogen supply, an effect mirrored over this period by more positive effects of elevated CO2 on soil nitrogen supply (net nitrogen mineralization) and plant nitrogen status under enriched than ambient nitrogen supply. The results did not strongly support either the progressive nitrogen limitation hypothesis, or the alternative hypothesis of priming of soil nitrogen release by elevated CO2. As nitrogen limitation to productivity is widespread, persistent nitrogen constraints on terrestrial responses to rising CO2 are probably pervasive. Further incorporation of such interactions into Earth system models is recommended to better predict future CO2 fertilization effects and impacts on the global carbon cycle.

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

4.8
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