4.8 Review

Climatic role of terrestrial ecosystem under elevated CO2: a bottom-up greenhouse gases budget

期刊

ECOLOGY LETTERS
卷 21, 期 7, 页码 1108-1118

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.13078

关键词

Climate change; elevated CO2; greenhouse gas; meta-analysis; plant C pool; soil C and N cycle

类别

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [41771268, 41225003, 41771323]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2015CB150502]
  3. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0201200]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [KYTZ201404, KYZ201621]
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1242531] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The net balance of greenhouse gas (GHG) exchanges between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere under elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) remains poorly understood. Here, we synthesise 1655 measurements from 169 published studies to assess GHGs budget of terrestrial ecosystems under elevated CO2. We show that elevated CO2 significantly stimulates plant C pool (NPP) by 20%, soil CO2 fluxes by 24%, and methane (CH4) fluxes by 34% from rice paddies and by 12% from natural wetlands, while it slightly decreases CH4 uptake of upland soils by 3.8%. Elevated CO2 causes insignificant increases in soil nitrous oxide (N2O) fluxes (4.6%), soil organic C (4.3%) and N (3.6%) pools. The elevated CO2-induced increase in GHG emissions may decline with CO2 enrichment levels. An elevated CO2-induced rise in soil CH4 and N2O emissions (2.76 Pg CO2-equivalent year(-1)) could negate soil C enrichment (2.42 Pg CO2 year(-1)) or reduce mitigation potential of terrestrial net ecosystem production by as much as 69% (NEP, 3.99 Pg CO2 year(-1)) under elevated CO2. Our analysis highlights that the capacity of terrestrial ecosystems to act as a sink to slow climate warming under elevated CO2 might have been largely offset by its induced increases in soil GHGs source strength.

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