4.7 Article

Carbon concentration of standing and downed woody detritus: Effects of tree taxa, decay class, position, and tissue type

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 291, 期 -, 页码 259-267

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.11.046

关键词

Angiosperm; Bark; Carbon; Coarse woody debris; Gymnosperm; Wood

类别

资金

  1. USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis
  2. Oregon State University [10-JV-11242305-017]
  3. USDA Forest Service
  4. National Science Foundation Long-term Studies Program [DEB-0823380]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The degree to which carbon concentration (CC) of woody detritus varies by tree taxa, stage of decay, tissue type (i.e., bark versus wood), and vertical orientation was examined in samples of 60 tree species from the Northern Hemisphere. The mean CC of 257 study samples was 49.3% with a range of 43.4-56.8%. Angiosperms had a significantly lower CC than gymnosperms, with means of 47.8% and 50.6%, respectively. For whole-stems (i.e., wood and bark), the CC of gymnosperms significantly increased from 49.3% to 53.5% with decomposition, while angiosperms had no significant change. The CC of bark was higher than wood across all stages of decay by an average of similar to 1.0%. A similar magnitude of difference was found for standing versus downed dead wood in the later stages of decay, with the former having a higher CC than the latter. Differences between angiosperms and gymnosperms are hypothesized to be associated with initial lignin concentrations as well as subsequent decomposition by white- versus brown-rot fungal functional groups. The higher abundance of brown-rots in decomposing gymnosperms may lead to an increase in lignin concentrations, a compound that has higher CC than cellulose. As a result of these findings, uncertainties associated with forest carbon inventories may be reduced by using detrital CC specific to general taxa (angiosperms versus gymnosperms) and stage of decay rather than a single assumed value of 50% as commonly practiced. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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