4.8 Article

Weaker soil carbon-climate feedbacks resulting from microbial and abiotic interactions

期刊

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 56-60

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2438

关键词

-

资金

  1. Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research of the US Department of Energy as part of their Regional and Global Climate Modeling (RGCM) Program [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  2. Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments (NGEE Arctic) project
  3. Early Career Development Grant by Earth Sciences Division of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The large uncertainty in soil carbon-climate feedback predictions has been attributed to the incorrect parameterization of decomposition temperature sensitivity (Q(10); ref. 1) and microbial carbon use effciency(2). Empirical experiments have found that these parameters vary spatiotemporally(3-6), but such variability is not included in current ecosystem models(7-13). Here we use a thermodynamically based decomposition model to test the hypothesis that this observed variability arises from interactions between temperature, microbial biogeochemistry, and mineral surface sorptive reactions. We show that because mineral surfaces interact with substrates, enzymes and microbes, both Q(10) and microbial carbon use effciency are hysteretic (so that neither can be represented by a single static function) and the conventional labile and recalcitrant substrate characterization with static temperature sensitivity is flawed. In a 4-K temperature perturbation experiment, our fully dynamic model predicted more variable but weaker soil carbon-climate feedbacks than did the static Q(10) and static carbon use effciency model when forced with yearly, daily and hourly variable temperatures. These results imply that current Earth system models probably overestimate the response of soil carbon stocks to global warming. Future ecosystem models should therefore consider the dynamic interactions between sorptive mineral surfaces, substrates and microbial processes.

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