Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 187–203 | Cite as

Age-Dependent Changes in Ecosystem Carbon Fluxes in Managed Forests in Northern Wisconsin, USA

  • Asko NoormetsEmail author
  • Jiquan Chen
  • Thomas R. Crow
Article

Abstract

The age-dependent variability of ecosystem carbon (C) fluxes was assessed by measuring the net ecosystem exchange of C (NEE) in five managed forest stands in northern Wisconsin, USA. The study sites ranged in age from 3-year-old clearcut to mature stands (65 years). All stands, except the clearcut, accumulated C over the study period from May to October 2002. Seasonal NEE estimates were −655 ± 17.5 g C m–2 in the mature hardwood (MHW), −648 ± 16.8 in the mature red pine (MRP), −195 ± 15.6 in the pine barrens (PB), +128 ± 17.1 in the young hardwood clearcut (YHW), and −313 ± 14.6 in the young red pine (YRP). The age-dependent differences were similar in the hardwood and conifer forests. Even though PB was not part of either the hardwood or conifer chronosequence, and had a different disturbance agent, it still fits the same general age relationship. Higher ecosystem respiration (ER) in the young than in the mature stands was the combined result of earlier soil warming in spring, and higher temperature and greater biological activity in summer, as indicated by temperature-normalized respiration rates. The fire-generated PB had lower ER than the harvest-generated YHW and YRP, where high ER was sustained partly on account of logging residue. During the main growing season, the equivalent of 31 (MHW), 48 (MRP), 68 (PB), 114 (YHW) and 71% (YRP) of daily gross ecosystem production (GEP) was released in ER during the same day. The lower ER:GEP ratio in the mature stands was driven by greater age-dependent changes in ER than GEP. The magnitude of the increase in ER:GEP ratio in spring and fall was interpreted as the extent of the decoupling of ER and GEP. Decoupling (sustained high ER despite decreasing GEP) was observed in YHW, PB and MHW, whereas in coniferous stands (MRP and YRP) the stable ER:GEP ratio suggested preferential use of new photosynthates in ER. The results indicate that a great part of the variation in landscape-level C fluxes can be accounted for by mean stand age and associated parameters, which highlights the need to consider this source of heterogeneity in regional C balance estimates.

Keywords

Eddy covariance forest age gross ecosystem production (GEPmanaged forests net ecosystem exchange (NEErespiration stand-replacing disturbance. 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the National Science Foundation (DEB-0129405), Northern and Southern Global Change Programs of the USDA Forest Service, University of Toledo and US–China Carbon Consortium. We gratefully acknowledge the Washburn Ranger District for permission to carry out the study on their land and the staff at University of Wisconsin Agricultural Research Station in Ashland for logistical support. Sincere thanks to David Billesbach for advice regarding data processing protocols. Jared DeForest offered constructive comments on the earlier versions of the manuscript and Lise Waring edited the language. Soung-Ryoul Ryu provided soil C and N data, John Rademacher, Dan Wozniczka and Leif Williams assisted with field data collection and site maintenance.

References

  1. Amiro BD. 2001. Paired-tower measurements of carbon and energy fluxes following disturbance in the boreal forest. Global Change Biol 7:253–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anthoni PM, Unsworth MH, Law BE, Irvine J, Baldocchi D, Van Tuyl S, Moore D. 2002. Seasonal differences in carbon and water vapor exchange in young and old-growth ponderosa pine ecosystems. Agric For Meteorol 111:203–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolstad PV, Davis KJ, Martin J, Cook BD, Wang W. 2004. Component and whole-system respiration fluxes in northern deciduous forests. Tree Physiol 24:493–504PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bresee MK, LeMoine J, Mather SV, Crow TR, Brosofske K, Chen J. 2004. Detecting landscape dynamics in Chequamegon National Forest in northern Wisconsin, from 1972 to 2001, using Landsat imagery. Landscape Ecol 19:291–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brosofske KD, Chen J, Crow TR. 2001. Understory vegetation and site factors: implications for a managed Wisconsin landscape. For Ecol Manage 146:75–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burba G, Anderson DJ, Xu L, McDermitt DK. 2006. Correcting apparent off-season CO2 uptake due o surface heating of an open path gas analyzer: progress report of an ongoing study. http://www.ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/109731.pdf
  7. Chen JQ, Saunders SC, Crow TR, Naiman RJ, Brosofske KD, Mroz GD, Brookshire BL, Franklin JF. 1999. Microclimate in forest ecosystem and landscape ecology−variations in local climate can be used to monitor and compare the effects of different management regimes. BioSci 49:288–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen J, Paw U KT, Ustin SL, Suchanek TH, Bond BJ, Brosofske KD, Falk M. 2004. Net ecosystem exchanges of carbon, water, and energy in young and old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Ecosystems 7:534–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cook BD, Davis KJ, Wang W, Desai A, Berger BW, Teclaw RM, Martin JG, Bolstad P, Bakwin PS, Yi C, Heilman WE. 2004. Carbon exchange and venting anomalies in an upland deciduous forest in northern Wisconsin, USA. Agric For Meteorol 126:271–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis KJ, Bakwin PS, Yi C, Berger BW, Zhao C, Teclaw RM, Isebrands JG. 2003. The annual cycles of CO2 and H2O exchange over a northern mixed forest as observed from a very tall tower. Global Change Biol 9:1278–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeForest JL, Noormets A, McNulty SG, Sun G, Tenney G, Chen J (2006) Phenophases alter the soil respiration-temperature relationship in an oak-dominated forest. Int J Biomet 51:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Desai AR, Noormets A, Bolstad PV, Chen J, Cook BD, Davis KJ, Euskirchen ES, Gough C, Martin JM, Ricciuto DM, Schmid HP, Tang J, Wang W. 2007. Influence of vegetation type, stand age and climate on carbon dioxide fluxes across the Upper Midwest, USA: implications for regional scaling of carbon flux. Agric For Meteorol, in pressGoogle Scholar
  13. Falge E, Baldocchi D, Olson R, Anthoni P, Aubinet M, Bernhofer C, Burba G, Ceulemans R, Clement R, Dolman H, Granier A, Gross P, Grünwald T, Hollinger D, Jensen N-O, Katul G, Keronen P, Kowalski A, Lai CT, Law BE, Meyers T, Moncrieff J, Moors E, Munger JW, Pilegaard K, Rannik Ü, Rebmann C, Suyker A, Tenhunen J, Tu K, Verma S, Vesala T, Wilson K, Wofsy S. 2001. Gap filling strategies for defensible annual sums of net ecosystem exchange. Agric For Meteorol 107:43–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Falge E, Baldocchi DD, Tenhunen J, Aubinet M, Bakwin PS, Berbigier P, Bernhofer C, Burba G, Clement R, Davis KJ, Elbers JA, Goldstein AH, Grelle A, Granier A, Guddmundsson J, Hollinger D, Kowalski AS, Katul G, Law BE, Malhi Y, Meyers T, Monson RK, Munger JW, Oechel W, Paw U KT, Pilegaard K, Rannik Ü, Rebmann C, Suyker A, Valentini R, Wilson K, Wofsy S. 2002. Seasonality of ecosystem respiration and gross primary production as derived from FLUXNET measurements. Agric For Meteorol 113:53–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goulden ML, Munger JW, Fan SM, Daube BC, Wofsy SC. 1996. Measurements of carbon sequestration by long-term eddy covariance: methods and critical evaluation of accuracy. Global Change Biol 2:169–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gower ST, McMurtrie RE, Murty D. 1996. Aboveground net primary production decline with stand age: potential causes. Trends Ecol Evol 11:378–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Anderson NH, Cline SP, Aumen NG, Sedell JR, Lienkaemper GW, Cromack K, Cummins KW. 1986. Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15:133–302Google Scholar
  18. Hicke JA, Asner GP, Kasischke ES, French NHF, Randerson JT, Collatz GJ, Stocks BJ, Tucker CJ, Los SO, Field CB. 2003. Postfire response of North American boreal forest net primary productivity analyzed with satellite observations. Global Change Biol 9:1145–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Högberg P, Nordgren A, Buchmann N, Taylor AFS, Ekblad A, Högberg MN, Nyberg G, Ottosson-Lofvenius M, Read DJ. 2001. Large-scale forest girdling shows that current photosynthesis drives soil respiration. Nature 411:789–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, Van der Linden PJ, Da X, Maskell K, Johnson CA. 2001. Climate change 2001: the scientific basics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 944Google Scholar
  21. Howard EA, Gower ST, Foley JT, Kucharik CJ. 2004. Effects of logging on carbon dynamics of a jack pine forest in Saskatchewan, Canada. Global Change Biol 10:1267–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Humphreys ER, Black TA, Morgenstern K, Li Z, Nesic Z. 2005. Net ecosystem production of a Douglas-fir stand for 3 years following clearcut harvesting. Global Change Biol 11:450–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Janssens IA, Lankreijer H, Matteucci G, Kowalski AS, Buchmann N, Epron D, Pilegaard K, Kutsch W, Longdoz B, Grünwald T, Montagnani L, Dore S, Rebmann C, Moors EJ, Grelle A, Rannik Ü, Morgenstern K, Oltchev S, Clement R, Guðmundsson J, Minerbi S, Berbigier P, Ibrom A, Moncrieff J, Aubinet M, Bernhofer C, Jensen NO, Vesala T, Granier A, Schulze E-D, Lindroth A, Dolman AJ, Jarvis PG, Ceulemans R, Valentini R. 2001. Productivity overshadows temperature in determining soil and ecosystem respiration across European forests. Global Change Biol 7:269–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolari P, Pumpanen J, Rannik Ü, Ilvesniemi H, Hari P, Berninger F. 2004. Carbon balance of different aged Scots pine forests in Southern Finland. Global Change Biol 10:1106–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kowalski AS, Loustau D, Berbigier P, Manca G, Tedeschi V, Borghetti M, Valentini R, Kolari P, Berninger F, Rannik Ü, Hari P, Rayment M, Mencuccini M, Moncrieff J, Grace J. 2004. Paired comparisons of carbon exchange between undisturbed and regenerating stands in four managed forests in Europe. Global Change Biol 10:1707–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Law BE, Thornton PE, Irvine J, Anthoni PM, Van Tuyl S. 2001. Carbon storage and fluxes in ponderosa pine forests at different developmental stages. Global Change Biol 7:755–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Law BE, Falge E, Guc L, Baldocchi DD, Bakwin PS, Berbigier P, Davis KJ, Dolman AJ, Falk M, Fuentes JD, Goldstein AH, Granier A, Grelle A, Hollinger D, Janssens IA, Jarvis PG, Jensen N-O, Katul G, Malhi Y, Matteucci G, Meyers T, Monson RK, Munger JW, Oechel W, Olson R, Pilegaard K, Paw U KT, Thorgeirsson H, Valentini R, Verma S, Vesala T, Wilson K, Wofsy S. 2002. Environmental controls over carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of terrestrial vegetation. Agric For Meteorol 113:97–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Law BE, Sun OJ, Campbell J, Van Tuyl S, Thornton PE. 2003. Changes in carbon storage and fluxes in a chronosequence of ponderosa pine. Global Change Biol 9:510–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee X, Massman WJ, Law BE. 2004. Handbook in micrometeorology. A guide for surface flux measurement and analysis, vol. 29, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 250Google Scholar
  30. Leuning R. 2004. Measurements of trace gas fluxes in the atmosphere using eddy covariance: WPL corrections revisited. In: Lee X, Massman WJ, Law BE, Lee X, Massman WJ, Law BEs, eds. Handbook of micrometeorology. A guide to surface flux measurement and analysis. Kluwer, Boston, 119–32Google Scholar
  31. Litvak M, Miller S, Wofsy SC, Goulden M. 2003. Effect of stand age on whole ecosystem CO2 exchange in the Canadian boreal forest. J Geophys Res−Atmos 108:art. no. 8225Google Scholar
  32. Noormets A, Desai A, Cook BD, Ricciuto DM, Euskirchen ES, Davis K, Bolstad P, Schmid HP, Vogel CS, Carey EV, Su H-B, Chen J. 2007. Moisture sensitivity of ecosystem respiration: comparison of 14 forest ecosystems in the Upper Great Lakes Region, USA. Agric For Meteorol, in pressGoogle Scholar
  33. Paw U KT, Baldocchi DD, Meyers T, Wilson KB. 2000. Correction of eddy-covariance measurements incorporating both advective effects and density fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 97:487–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paw U KT, Falk M, Suchanek TH, Ustin SL, Chen J, Park Y-S, Winner WE, Thomas SC, Hsiao TC, Shaw RH, King TS, Pyles RD, Schroeder M, Matista AA. 2004. CO2, H2O, and energy fluxes of an old-growth forest. Ecosystems 7:513–24Google Scholar
  35. Potter C, Tan PN, Steinbach M, Klooster S, Kumar V, Myneni R, Genovese V. 2003. Major disturbance events in terrestrial ecosystems detected using global satellite data sets. Global Change Biol 9:1005–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pregitzer KS, Euskirchen ES. 2004. Carbon cycling and storage in world forests: biome patterns related to forest age. Global Change Biol 10:2052–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Richardson AD, Hollinger DY, Burba GG, Davis KJ, Flanagan LB, Katul GG, Munger JW, Ricciuto DM, Stoy PC, Suyker AE, Verma SB, Wofsy SC. 2006. A multi-site analysis of random error in tower-based measurements of carbon and energy fluxes. Agric For Meteorol 136:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ryan MG, Binkley D, Fownes JH. 1997. Age-related decline in forest productivity: pattern and process. Adv Ecol Res 27:213–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schmid HP, Su H-B, Vogel CS, Curtis PS. 2003. Ecosystem-atmosphere exchange of carbon dioxide over a mixed hardwood forest in northern lower Michigan. J Geophys Res 108, NO. D14, 4417, doi:10.1029/2002JD003011:6.1-6.19Google Scholar
  40. Schotanus P, Nieuwstadt FTM, de Bruin HAR. 1983. Temperature measurement with a sonic anemometer and its application to heat and moisture fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 26:81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sun OJ, Campbell J, Law BE, Wolf V. 2004. Dynamics of carbon stocks in soils and detritus across chronosequences of different forest types in the Pacific Northwest, USA. Global Change Biol 10:1470–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Turner DP, Guzy M, Lefsky MA, Van Tuyl S, Sun O, Daly C, Law BE. 2003. Effects of land use and fine-scale environmental heterogeneity on net ecosystem production over a temperate coniferous forest landscape. Tellus B 55:657–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Webb EK, Pearman GI, Leuning R. 1980. Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapor transfer. Quart J R Meteorol Soc 106:85–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilczak JM, Oncley SP, Stage SA. 2001. Sonic anemometer tilt correction algorithms. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 99:127–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth, Ecological and Environmental SciencesUniversity of ToledoToledoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Forestry and Environmental ResourcesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  3. 3.USDA Forest ServiceArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations