, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp 141–162

Sulfate deposition and temperature controls on methane emission and sulfur forms in peat

  • Vincent Gauci
  • David Fowler
  • Stephen J. Chapman
  • Nancy B. Dise


Natural wetlands are the single most important contributors of methane (CH4) to the atmosphere. Recent research has shown that the deposition of sulfate (SO42-) can substantially reduce the emission of this radiatively important gas from wetlands. However, the influence of temperature in regulating the extent of this effect is unclear. Peatlands also constitute an important store of sulfur (S), so understanding the effect of S deposition on S dynamics within this store is important if we are to understand the interaction. The effect of enhanced SO42- deposition on CH4 fluxes and S pools were investigated in peatland monoliths under controlled environment conditions. This enabled a close examination of effects at the onset of experimentally enhanced SO42- deposition while examining temperature effects on the interaction. Experimentally enhanced S deposition at rates as small as 15 kg SO42--S ha−1 year−1 suppressed CH4 emissions by 30%. There was no increased suppression at larger deposition rates of simulated acid rain. Temperature affected the suppressive effect of the simulated acid rain. At low temperatures (down to 5 °C), there was a greater proportional suppression than at higher temperatures (up to 20 °C). Evidence suggests that populations of SO42--reducing bacteria do not respond, as previously thought, to enhanced SO42- supply with a 'boom' followed by a 'bust' and less recalcitrant S pools (SO42- and S°) were depleted in the SO42--treated peat, indicating enhanced S turnover. A significant proportion of the SO42- from the treatment was taken up and stored as SO42- in vascular plants, placing this mechanism as a potentially important seasonal regulator of peatland SO42- availability.

Acid rain Climate Methane Peat Sulfate Wetland 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arah J.R.M. and Stephen K.D. 1998. A model of the processes leading to methane emission from peatland. Atmos. Environ. 32(19): 3257-3264.Google Scholar
  2. Bell C.I., Clarkson D.T. and Cram W.J. 1995. Sulfate supply and its regulation of transport in roots of a tropical legume Macroptilium atropurpureum cv. siratro. J. Exp. Bot. 46(282): 65-71.Google Scholar
  3. Bodegom P.M. van and Stams A.J.M. 1999. Effects of alternate electron acceptors and temperature on methanogenesis in rice soils. Chemosphere 39(1): 167-182.Google Scholar
  4. Chapman S.J. 2001. Sulfur forms in open and afforested areas of two Scottish peatlands. Water Air Soil Pollut. (1-2): 23-39.Google Scholar
  5. Dise N.B. and Verry E.S. 2001. Suppression of peatland methane emission by cumulative sulfate de-position in simulated acid rain. Biogeochemistry 53(2): 143-160.Google Scholar
  6. Donald D.R. 1994. The diagnosis of S status in soils and crops. M. Phil. Thesis, University of Aberdeen, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Fowler D., MacDonald J., Leith I.D., Hargreaves K.J. and Martynoga R. 1995. The response of peat wetland methane emissions to temperature, water table and sulphate deposition. In: Heij G.J. and Erisman J.W. (eds) Acid Rain Research: Do We Have Enough Answers? Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 485-487.Google Scholar
  8. Freeman C., Hudson J., Lock M.A., Reynolds B. and Swanson C. 1994. A possible role of sulphate in the suppression of wetland methane fluxes following drought. Soil Biol. Biochem. 26: 1439-1442.Google Scholar
  9. Freney J.R., Jacq V.A. and Balensperger J.F. 1982. The significance of the biological sulfur cycle in rice production. In: Dommergues Y.R. and Diem H.G. (eds) Microbiology of Tropical Soils and Plant Productivity. Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk Boston.Google Scholar
  10. Gauci V., Dise N.B. and Fowler D. 2002. Controls on suppression of methane flux from a peat bog subjected to simulated acid rain sulfate deposition. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 16(1): 10.1029/ 2000GB001370.Google Scholar
  11. Gede I., Aiputra K. and Anderson 1992. Distribution and redistribution of sulphur taken up from nutrient solution during vegetative growth in barley. Physiol. Plant. 85: 453-460.Google Scholar
  12. Granberg G., Sundh I. and Svensson B.H. et al. 2001. Effects of temperature, and nitrogen and sulfur deposition, on methane emission from a boreal mire. Ecology 82(7): 1982-1998.Google Scholar
  13. Hansen J., Sato M., Ruedy R., Lacis A. and Oinas V. 2000. Global warming in the twenty-first century: An alternative scenario. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 97(18): 9875-9880.Google Scholar
  14. Hines M.E., Evans R.S., Genthner B.R.S., Willis S.G., Friedman S., Rooney-Varga J.N. and Devereux R. 1999. Molecular phylogenetic and biogeochemical studies of sulfate-reducing bacteria in the rhizo-sphere of Spartina alterniflora. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65(5): 2209-2216.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson C.M. and Nishita H. 1952. Microestimation of sulfur in plant materials, soils, and irrigation waters. Anal. Chem. 24: 736-742.Google Scholar
  16. Kim J., Verma S.B. and Billesbach D.P. 1999. Seasonal variation in methane emission from a temperate Phragmites-dominated marsh: effect of growth stage and plant-mediated transport. Global Change Biol. 5(4): 433-440.Google Scholar
  17. King J.Y., Reeburgh W.S. and Regli S.K. 1998. Methane emission and transport by arctic sedges in Alaska: Results of a vegetation removal experiment. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 103(D22): 29083-29092.Google Scholar
  18. Lu Y., Wassmann R., Neue H.U. and Huang C. 1999. Impact of phosphorus supply on root exudation, aerenchyma formation and methane emission of rice plants. Biogeochemistry 47(2): 203-218.Google Scholar
  19. MacDonald J.A. 1997. Methane oxidation in temperate and tropical soils. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
  20. MacDonald J.A., Fowler D., Hargreaves K.J., Skiba U., Leith I.D. and Murray M.B. 1998. Methane emission rates from a northern wetland; Response to temperature, water table and transport Atmos. Environ. 32(19): 3219-3227.Google Scholar
  21. Nedwell D.B. and Watson A. 1995. CH4 production, oxidation and emission in a UK ombrotrophic peat bog: influence of SO 2 4 from acid rain. Soil Biol. Biochem. 27: 893-903.Google Scholar
  22. Nesbit S.P. and Breitenbeck G.A. 1992. A laboratory study of factors influencing methane uptake by soils. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 41(1): 39-54.Google Scholar
  23. Neue H.U., Wassmann R., Lantin R.S., Alberto M.A.C.R., Aduna J.B. and Javellana A.M. 1996. Factors affecting methane emission from rice fields. Atmos. Environ. 30(10-11): 1751-1754.Google Scholar
  24. Reeve A.S., Siegel D.I. and Glaser P.H. 1996. Geochemical controls on peatland pore water from the Hudson Bay Lowland: a multivariate statistical approach. J. Hydrol. 181(1-4): 285-304.Google Scholar
  25. Rejmankova E. and Post R.A. 1996. Methane in sulfate-rich and sulfate-poor wetland sediments. Bio-geochemistry 34: 57-70.Google Scholar
  26. Schimel J.P. 1995. Plant-transport and methane production as controls on methane flux from arctic wet meadow tundra. Biogeochemistry 28(3): 183-200.Google Scholar
  27. Singh S., Kashyap A.K. and Singh J.S. 1998. Methane flux in relation to growth and phenology of a high yielding rice variety as affected by fertilization. Plant Soil 201(1): 157-164.Google Scholar
  28. Watson A. and Nedwell D.B. 1998. Methane production and emission from peat: the influence of anions (sulphate, nitrate) from acid rain. Atmos. Environ. 32: 3239-3245.Google Scholar
  29. Wieder R.K. and Lang G.E. 1988. cycling of inorganic and organic sulfur in peat from big run bog, West-Virginia. Biogeochemistry 5(2): 221-242.Google Scholar
  30. Wieder R.K., Lang G.E. and Granus V.A. 1985. An evaluation of wet chemical methods for quantifying sulfur fractions in fresh-water wetland peat. Limnol. Oceanogr. 30, 1109.Google Scholar
  31. Wieder R.K., Yavitt J.B. and Lang G.E. 1990. Methane Production and Sulfate Reduction in 2 Appa-lachian Peatlands. Biogeochemistry 10(2): 81-104.Google Scholar
  32. Zhabina N.N. and Volcov I.I. 1978. 'A method of determination of various sulfur compounds in sea sediments and rock'. In: Krumbein W.E. (ed) Environmental Biogeochemistry and Geomicrobiology. Methods, Metals and Assessment. Vol. 3, Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, pp. 735-746.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent Gauci
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Fowler
    • 2
  • Stephen J. Chapman
    • 3
  • Nancy B. Dise
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Earth SciencesThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, PenicuikMidlothianUK
  3. 3.Macaulay Institute, CraigiebucklerAberdeenUK
  4. 4.Department of BiologyVillanova UniversityVillanovaUSA

Personalised recommendations