4.7 Article

Fluxes of dissolved organic carbon in three tropical secondary forests developed on serpentine and mudstone

期刊

GEODERMA
卷 163, 期 1-2, 页码 119-126

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.04.012

关键词

DOC flux; Oxisol; Serpentine; Soil organic matter; Soil respiration; Soil solution; Ultisol

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20248008, 21405039, 11J05776, 20248034] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Leaching of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) from the organic (0) horizon plays an important role in soil C cycles and formation of soil organic matter. The magnitude of DOC fluxes in throughfall and soil solutions was quantified in three tropical secondary forests affected by the former selective logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. The sites were located on the Oxisol soil formed on serpentine and two Ultisol soils formed on mudstone. The DOC fluxes in the soil profiles are highest in the O horizons, decreasing markedly with depth at all sites. The DOC fluxes from the O horizons varied greatly from 166 to 261 kg C ha(-1) yr(-1) in Ultisols to 603 kg C ha(-1) yr(-1) in Oxisol, which corresponded to 3.7 to 11.4% of C input. The DOC export from the B horizons was consistently low (10 to 31 kg C ha(-1) yr(-1)) due probably to the high DOC adsorption of the clayey Oxisol and Ultisol soils. The contribution of DOC fluxes to soil C balance is minor compared to litterfall (4.0 to 4.8 Mg C ha(-1) yr(-1)) and organic matter decomposition (4.2 to 4.7 Mg C ha(-1) yr(-1)), however, DOC leached from the O horizon appears to be an important C source into the mineral soils. The magnitude of DOC leaching from the O horizon increased with decreasing P concentration in foliar litter, whereas DOC consumption in the deeper soil horizons is related to clay content that originates from parent materials. The roles of DOC leaching to soil C cycle are shown to be variable at a local scale, depending on vegetation and parent material. (C) 2011 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