Ecosystem Properties and the Continued Operation of the Terrestrial Carbon Sink
Four ecosystem properties are particularly important in determining the magnitude and continued operation of the terrestrial carbon sink as CO2 levels rise, anthropogenic N-deposition continues and the climate changes. First, the time lag between the responses of NPP (net primary productivity) and soil respiration make it inevitable that a transient carbon sink is created in response to continuously increasing CO2 levels. The magnitude of this effect depends on the responses of photosynthesis and plant growth to elevated CO2 and the residence time of carbon in ecosystem pools. Secondly, the temperature sensitivities of NPP and soil respiration are critical in determining the responses of ecosystems to warming. The temperature responses of the component processes need to be better known, and feedbacks involving nutrients, water and CO2 can be overriding. Thirdly, the extent to which ecosystems respond to elevated CO2 by increasing nutrient acquisition and/or use efficiency is critical in determining the amount of carbon that can be sequestered. The extent and consequences of increased carbon allocation to roots in nutrient-limited ecosystems, and shifts of nutrients between ecosystem components are particularly important. Fourthly, the extent of water-stress-induced decreases in NPP and vegetation (especially forest) dieback depend on stomatal responses to elevated CO2 and changes in leaf area, which in turn depend on nutrient supplies. It is concluded that there is no short-cut to modelling all the main processes and couplings within the carbon, nutrient and water cycles if the current and future behaviour of the terrestrial carbon sink is to be predicted.
KeywordsSoil Respiration Carbon Sink Terrestrial Carbon Ecosystem Property Maintenance Respiration
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Cannell M.G.R. (1995): Forests and the global carbon cycle in the past, present and future. Research Report 2. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland. 68pp.Google Scholar
- Gifford R.M. (1994a): Implications of CO2 effects on vegetation for the global carbon budget, pp. 159–199. In: The global carbon cycle. M. Heimann (editor). NATO ASI Series Vol I, 15. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
- Hilbert D.W., Larigauderie A., Reynolds J.F. (1991): The influence of carbon dioxide and daily photon-flux density on optimal leaf nitrogen concentration and root:shoot ratio. Annals of Botany, 68: 385–376.Google Scholar
- Kirschbaum M.U.F., King D.A., Comins H.N., McMurtrie R.E., Medlyn B.E., Pongracie S., Murty D., Keith H., Raison R.J., Khanna P.K., Sherriff D.W. (1994): Modelling forest responses to increasing CO2 concentration under nutrient-limited conditions. Plant, Cell and Environment, 17: 1081–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kirschbaum M.U.F. (1995): The temperature dependence of soil organic matter decomposition and the effect of global warming on soil organic carbon storage. Soil Biol. Biochem., 27: 753–760.Google Scholar
- Kirschbaum M.U.F., Fischlin A., Cannell M.G.R., Cruz R.V.O., Galinski W., Cramer W.P. (1996): Climate change impacts on forests, pp 93–128 In: Climate Change 1995. Impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change: scientific-technical analyses. Contribution of working group II to the second assessment report of the IPCC.Google Scholar
- Watson R.T., Zinyowera M. C., Moss R. H., Dokken D. J. (editors). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Melillo J.M., Prentice I.C., Farquhar G.D., Schulze E.-D., Sala O.E. (1996): Terrestrial biotic responses to environmental change and feedbacks to climate, pp. 447 – 481. In: Climate change. The science of climate change. J. H. Houghton, L. G. Meira Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, K. Maskell (editors). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Parry M.L., Carter T.R., Hulme M. (1996): What is a dangerous climate change? Global Environmental Change, 6: 1–6.Google Scholar
- Rastetter E.B., Ryan M.G., Shaver G.R., Mellilo J.M., Nadelhoffer K.J., Hobbie J.E., Aber J. D. (1991): A general biogeochemical model describing the responses of the C and N cycles in terrestrial ecosystems to changes in CO2, climate and N deposition. Tree Physiology, 9: 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rotmans J., Elzen den M.G.J. (1993): Modelling feedback mechanisms in the carbon cycle: balancing the carbon budget. Tellus, 45B: 301–320.Google Scholar
- Wullschleger S.D., Post W.M., King A.W. (1993): On the potential for a CO2 fertilisation effect in forest trees, pp. 85–107. In: Biosheric feedbacks in the global climate system: will warming speed warming? (ed. G.M. Woodwell and F.T. McKenzie). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar