The Effect of Land-Use Change on Soil CH4 and N2O Fluxes: A Global Meta-Analysis
Land-use change is a prominent feature of the Anthropocene. Transitions between natural and human-managed ecosystems affect biogeochemical cycles in many ways, but soil processes are among the least understood. We used a global meta-analysis (62 studies, 1670 paired comparisons) to examine effects of land conversion on soil–atmosphere fluxes of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from upland soils, and determine soil and environmental factors driving these effects. Conversion from a natural ecosystem to any anthropogenic land use increased soil CH4 and N2O fluxes by 234 kg CO2-equivalents ha−1 y−1, on average. Reversion of managed ecosystems to that resembling natural ecosystems did not fully reverse those effects, even after 80 years. In general, neither the type of ecosystem converted, nor the type of subsequent anthropogenic land use, affected the magnitude of increase in soil emissions. Land-use changes in wetter ecosystems resulted in greater increases in CH4 fluxes, but reduced N2O fluxes. An interacting suite of soil variables influenced CH4 and N2O fluxes, with availability of inorganic nitrogen (that is, extractable ammonium and nitrate), pH, total carbon, and microclimate being strong mediators of effects of land-use change. In addition, time after a change in land use emerged as a critical factor explaining the effects of land-use change—with increased emissions of both greenhouse gases diminishing rapidly after conversion. Further research is needed to elucidate complex biotic and abiotic mechanisms that drive land-use change effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions, but particularly during this initial disturbance when emissions are greatest relative to native vegetation. Efforts to mitigate emissions will be severely hampered by this gap in knowledge.
Keywordsafforestation climate change cultivation deforestation global change greenhouse gas emissions methane nitrous oxide
MAA acknowledges the support of the Australian Research Council. We would like to thank Drs. Lachlan Ingram, Feike Dijkstra, and Alberto Canarini for helpful discussion over the data and meta-analyses. We thank Drs. Klaus Butterbach-Bahl and Monica Turner, and three anonymous reviewers, for helpful comments and suggestions that have improved this manuscript.
- Dunfield P. 2007. The soil methane sink. In: Reay DS, Hewitt CN, Smith KA, Grace J, editors. Greenhouse gas sinks. CABI. pp 152–170.Google Scholar
- Firestone MK, Davidson EA. 1989. Microbiological basis of NO and N2O production and consumption in soil. Exch Trace Gas Between Terr Ecosyst Atmos 47:7–21.Google Scholar
- Galbally I, Meyer CP, Wang Y-P, Kirstine W. 2010. Soil–atmosphere exchange of CH4, CO, N2O and NOx and the effects of land-use change in the semiarid Mallee system in Southeastern Australia. Glob Chang Biol 16:2407–19.Google Scholar
- Knief C. 2015. Diversity and habitat preferences of cultivated and uncultivated aerobic methanotrophic nacteria evaluated based on pmoA as molecular marker. Front Microbiol 6(1346):1–38.Google Scholar
- Liaw A, Wiener M. 2002. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2:18–22.Google Scholar
- Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon FM, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque JF, Lee D, Mendoza B. 2013. Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. Clim Chang 423:658–740.Google Scholar
- Rosenberg MS, Adams DC, Gurevitch J. 2000. MetaWin: statistical software for meta-analysis. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
- Smith KA, Dobbie KE, Ball BC, Bakken LR, Sitaula BK, Hansen S, Brumme R, Borken W, Christensen S, Priemé A, Fowler D, Macdonald JA, Skiba U, Klemedtsson L, Kasimir-Klemedtsson A, Degórska A, Orlanski P. 2000. Oxidation of atmospheric methane in Northern European soils, comparison with other ecosystems, and uncertainties in the global terrestrial sink. Glob Chang Biol 6:791–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Solomon S. 2007. Climate change 2007-the physical science basis: Working group I contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar