, Volume 7, Issue 5, pp 573–582 | Cite as

The Effects of Infrared Loading and Water Table on Soil Energy Fluxes in Northern Peatlands

  • Asko NoormetsEmail author
  • Jiquan Chen
  • Scott D. Bridgham
  • Jake F. Weltzin
  • John Pastor
  • Brad Dewey
  • James LeMoine
Original Paper


Increased radiative forcing is an inevitable part of global climate change, yet little is known of its potential effects on the energy fluxes in natural ecosystems. To simulate the conditions of global warming, we exposed peat monoliths (depth, 0.6 m; surface area, 2.1 m2) from a bog and fen in northern Minnesota, USA, to three infrared (IR) loading (ambient, +45, and +90 W m−2) and three water table (−16, −20, and −29 cm in bog and −1, −10 and −18 cm in fen) treatments, each replicated in three mesocosm plots. Net radiation (Rn) and soil energy fluxes at the top, bottom, and sides of the mesocosms were measured in 1999, 5 years after the treatments had begun. Soil heat flux (G) increased proportionately with IR loading, comprising about 3%–8% of Rn. In the fen, the effect of IR loading on G was modulated by water table depth, whereas in the bog it was not. Energy dissipation from the mesocosms occurred mainly via vertical exchange with air, as well as with deeper soil layers through the bottom of the mesocosms, whereas lateral fluxes were 10–20-fold smaller and independent of IR loading and water table depth. The exchange with deeper soil layers was sensitive to water table depth, in contrast to G, which responded primarily to IR loading. The qualitative responses in the bog and fen were similar, but the fen displayed wider seasonal variation and greater extremes in soil energy fluxes. The differences of G in the bog and fen are attributed to differences in the reflectance in the long waveband as a function of vegetation type, whereas the differences in soil heat storage may also depend on different soil properties and different water table depth at comparable treatments. These data suggest that the ecosystem-dependent controls over soil energy fluxes may provide an important constraint on biotic response to climate change.

heat flux infrared loading mesocosm net radiation soil energy balance wetland 



This study was supported by National Science Foundation grants number DEB9496305 and DEB9707426. We are grateful to Karen Updegraff, Cal Harth, Mark Rudnicki, Xinli Wang, and Treneice Marshall for invaluable help in maintaining the experiment.


  1. 1.
    Aselmann, I, Crutzen, PJ 1989Global distribution of natural fresh-water wetlands and rice paddies, their net primary productivity, seasonality and possible methane emissionsJ Atmos Chem830758Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartlett, KB, Harriss, RC 1993Review and assessment of methane emissions from wetlandsChemosphere26261320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bridgham, SD, Johnston, CA, Pastor, J, Updegraff, K 1995Potential feedbacks of northern wetlands on climate changeBioScience4526274Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bridgham, SD, Pastor, J, Janssens, IA, Chapin, CT, Malterer, TJ 1996Multiple limiting gradients in peatlands: a call for a new paradigmWetlands164565Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bridgham, SD, Updegraff, K, Pastor, J 1998Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus mineralization in northern wetlandsEcology79154561Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bridgham, SD, Pastor, J, Updegraff, K, Malterer, TJ, Johnson, K, Harth, C, Chen, J 1999Ecosystem control over temperature and energy flux in northern peatlandsEcol Appl9134558Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bridgham, SD, Ping, C-L, Richardson, JL, Updegraff, K 2001aSoils of northern peatlands: Histosols and GelisolsRichardson, JLVepraskas, MJRichardson, JLVepraskas, MJ eds. Wetland soils: genesis, hydrology, landscapes, and classificationCRC PressBoca Raton (FL)34370Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bridgham, SD, Updegraff, K, Pastor, J 2001bA comparison of nutrient availability indices along an ombrotrophic-minerotrophic gradient in Minnesota wetlandsSoil Sci Soc Am J6525969Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burba, GG, Verma, S, Kim, J 1999aA comparative study of surface energy fluxes of three communities (Phragmites australis, Scirpus acutus, and open water) in a prairie wetland ecosystemWetlands194517Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burba, GG, Verma, SB, Kim, J 1999bSurface energy fluxes of Phragmites australis in a prairie wetlandAgric For Meteorol943151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chapin, CT 1988Plant community response and nutrient dynamics as a result of manipulations of pH and nutrients in a bog and fen in northeastern MinnesotaUniversity Press of Notre DameNotre Dame (IN)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clymo, RS, Hayward, PM 1982The ecology of SphagnumSmith, AJE eds. Bryophyte ecologyChapman & HallLondon22989Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cody, RP, Smith, JK 1991Applied statistics and the SAS programming languagePrentice HallUpper Saddle River (NJ)445Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gorham, E 1991Northern peatlands—role in the carbon-cycle and probable responses to climatic warmingEcol Appl118295Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hargreaves, KJ, Fowler, D, Pitcairn, CER, Aurela, M 2001Annual methane emission from Finnish mires estimated from eddy covariance campaign measurementsTheoret Appl Climatol7020313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harte, J, Torn, MS, Chang, FR, Feifarek, B, Kinzig, A, Shen, K 1995Global warming and soil microclimate—results from a meadow-warming experimentEcol Appl513250Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    [IPCC] (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basics, pp 83Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kattenberg, A, Giorgi, F, Grassl, H, Meehl, GA, Mitchell, FB, Stouffer, RJ, Tokioka and others., T 1996Climate models—projections of future climateHoughton, JTFilho, LGMCallander, BAHarris, NKattenberg, AMaskell, K eds. Climate change 1995: the science of climate changeCambridge University PressCambridge (UK)285357Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Madeira, AC, Gillespie, TJ, Duke, CL 2001Effect of wetness on turfgrass canopy reflectanceAgric For Meteorol10711730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matthews, E, Fung, I 1987Methane emission from natural wetlands: global distribution, area, and environmental chracteristics of sourcesGlobal Biogeochem Cycles16186Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McFadden, JP, Chapin III, FS, Hollinger, DY 1998Subgrid-scale variability in the surface energy balance of arctic tundraJ Geophy Res10328,94761Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moore, PD 2002The future of cool temperate bogsEnviron Conserv29320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moore, PD, Bellamy, DJ 1974PeatlandsSpringer-VerlagNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nisbet, EG, Ingham, B 1995Methane output from natural and quasinatural sources: a review of the potential for change and for biotic and abiotic feedbacksWoodwell, GMMackenzie, FT eds. Biotic feedbacks in the global climatic systemOxford University PressNew York188218Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pastor J, Solin J, Bridgham SD, Updegraff K, Harth C, Weishampel P, Dewey B. Global warming and the export of dissolved organic carbon from boreal peatlands. Oikos. 100: 380–386Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roulet, NT, Moore, TR, Bubier, J, Lafluer, P 1992Northern fens: methane flux and climatic changeTellus44B1005Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rouse, WR 1998A water balance model for a subarctic sedge fen and its application to climatic changeClim Change3820734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sampson, RN, Apps, M, Brown, S, Cole, CV, Downing, J, Heath, LS, Ojima, DS,  et al. 1993Workshop summary statement. Terrestrial biospheric carbon fluxes: quantification of sinks and sources of CO2.Water Air Soil Pollut70315Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmid, HP 1994Source areas for scalars and scalar fluxesBoundary Layer Meteorol67293318Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sellers, PJ, Dickinson, RE, Randall, DA, Betts, AK, Hall, FG, Berry, JA, Collatz, GJ,  et al. 1997Modeling the exchanges of energy, water, and carbon between continents and the atmosphereScience2755029CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shurpali, NJ, Verma, S 1998Micrometeorological measurements of methane flux in a Minnesota peatland during two growing seasonsBiogeochemistry40115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Spanglet, HJ, Ustin, SL, Rejmankova, E 1998Spectral reflectance characteristics of California subalpine marsh plant communitiesWetlands830719Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Updegraff, K, Bridgham, SD, Pastor, J, Weishampel, P, Harth, C 2001Response of CO2 and CH4 emissions from peatlands to warming and water table manipulationEcol Appl1131126Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Van Cleve, K, Chapin III, FS, Dyrness, CT, Viereck, LA 1991Element cycling in taiga forest: state-factor controlBioScience417888Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weltzin, JF, Pastor, J, Harth, C, Bridgham, SD, Updegraff, K, Chapin, CT 2000Response of bog and fen plant communities to warming and water-table manipulationsEcology813,46478Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weltzin, JF, Harth, C, Bridgham, SD, Pastor, J, Vonderharr, M 2001Production and microtopography of bog bryophytes: response to warming and water-table manipulationsOecologia12855765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weltzin, JF, Bridgham, SD, Pastor, J, Chen, J, Harth, C 2003Potential effects of warming and drying on peatland plant community compositionGlobal Change Biol9111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang Y, Li C, Trettin CC, Li H, Sun G. 2002. An integrated model of soil, hydrology and vegetation for carbon dynamics in wetland ecosystem. Global Biogeochem Cycles. Available online at: 10.1029/2001GB001838.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zheng, D, Prince, SD, Wright, R 2003Terrestrial net primary production estimates for 0.5 degree grid cells from field observations: a contribution to global biogeochemical modelingGlobal Change Biol94664CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asko Noormets
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jiquan Chen
    • 1
  • Scott D. Bridgham
    • 2
  • Jake F. Weltzin
    • 3
  • John Pastor
    • 4
  • Brad Dewey
    • 2
  • James LeMoine
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Earth, Ecological, and Environmental SciencesUniversity of ToledoUSA
  2. 2.Center for Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of OregonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of TennesseeUSA
  4. 4.Department of BiologyUniversity of MinnesotaUSA

Personalised recommendations