Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 152–155 | Cite as

Is Net Ecosystem Production Equal to Ecosystem Carbon Accumulation?

  • Gary M. LovettEmail author
  • Jonathan J. Cole
  • Michael L. Pace
COMMENTARY

Abstract

Net ecosystem production (NEP), defined as the difference between gross primary production and total ecosystem respiration, represents the total amount of organic carbon in an ecosystem available for storage, export as organic carbon, or nonbiological oxidation to carbon dioxide through fire or ultraviolet oxidation. In some of the recent literature, especially that on terrestrial ecosystems, NEP has been redefined as the rate of organic carbon accumulation in the system. Here we argue that retaining the original definition maintains the conceptual coherence between NEP and net primary production and that it is congruous with the widely accepted definitions of ecosystem autotrophy and heterotrophy. Careful evaluation of NEP highlights the various potential fates of nonrespired carbon in an ecosystem.

Keywords

net ecosystem production carbon accumulation net primary production gross primary production total ecosystem respiration 

References

  1. Broecker WS, Takahashi T, Simpson HJ, Peng TH. 1979. Fate of fossil fuel carbon dioxide and the global carbon budget. Science 206:409–18Google Scholar
  2. Caspersen JP, Pacala SW, Jenkins JC, Hurtt GC, Moorcroft PR, Birdsey RA. 2000. Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in US forests. Science 290:1148–1151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Chapin FS. III, Matson PA, Mooney HA. 2002. Principles of terrestrial ecosystem ecology. New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. Cole JJ, Pace ML, Carpenter SR, Kitchell JF. 2000. Persistence of net heterotrophy in lakes during nutrient addition and food web manipulations. Limnol Oceangr 45(8):1718–30Google Scholar
  5. Hamilton JG, DeLucia EH, George K, Naidu SL, Finzi AC, Schlesinger WH. 2002. Forest carbon balance under elevated CO2. Oecologia 131:250–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hanson PC, Bade DL, Carpenter SR, and Kratz TK. 2003. Lake metabolism: relationships with dissolved organic carbon and phosphorus. Limnol Oceanogr 48:1112–9Google Scholar
  7. Lichter J. 1998. Primary succession and forest development on coastal Lake Michigan sand dunes. Ecol Monogr 68:487–510Google Scholar
  8. Luz B, Barkan E, Bender ML, Thiemens MH, Boering KA. 1997. Triple-isotope composition of atmospheric oxygen as a tracer of biosphere productivity. Nature 400:547–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Randerson JT, Chapin FS, Harden JW, Neff JC, Harmon ME. 2002. Net ecosystem production: a comprehensive measure of net carbon accumulation by ecosystems. Ecol Appl 12:937–47Google Scholar
  10. Raymond PA, Cole JJ. 2003. Increase in the export of alkalinity form North America’s largest river. Science 302:88–91Google Scholar
  11. Schlesinger WH. 1997. Biogeochemistry: An Analysis of Global Change. 2nd ed. Academic Press, San Diego, p. 159Google Scholar
  12. Schulze ED, Wirth C, Heimann M. 2000. Managing forest after Kyoto. Science 289:2058–2059CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Siegenthaler U, Sarmiento JL. 1993. Atmospheric carbon dioxide and the ocean. Nature 365 (9):119–25Google Scholar
  14. Woodwell GM, Whittaker RH. 1968. Primary production in terrestrial ecosystems. Am Zoologist 8:19–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gary M. Lovett
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jonathan J. Cole
    • 1
  • Michael L. Pace
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Ecosystem StudiesMillbrookUSA

Personalised recommendations