Ecosystems

, Volume 13, Issue 8, pp 1157–1170 | Cite as

Response of Terrestrial CH4 Uptake to Interactive Changes in Precipitation and Temperature Along a Climatic Gradient

  • Joseph C. Blankinship
  • Jamie R. Brown
  • Paul Dijkstra
  • Michael C. Allwright
  • Bruce A. Hungate
Article

Abstract

We determined the response of terrestrial methane (CH4) uptake to 4 years of full-factorial manipulations of precipitation and temperature in four ecosystems along a 50 km warm and dry to cold and wet climatic gradient (desert grassland, pinyon-juniper woodland, ponderosa pine forest, and mixed conifer forest). Our goals were to determine whether ecosystem-specific, intraannual, and interactive responses to altered precipitation and warming are quantitatively important. Passive collectors and interceptors increased (+50% per event) and reduced (−30% per event) the quantity of precipitation delivered to experimental plant–soil mesocosms, and downward transfer along the elevation gradient warmed mesocosms by 1.8°C on average. Methane uptake in the colder and wetter ecosystems along the gradient decreased with increasing precipitation, especially during the wet season. The warmer and drier ecosystems, however, responded more strongly to warming, exhibiting less CH4 uptake with increasing temperature. We found no interaction between altered precipitation and warming in any ecosystem. Soil CH4 consumption in the laboratory was a strong predictor of ecosystem differences in field CH4 consumption, but was a poor predictor of the effects of climatic change observed in the field. Based on our results, future climate scenarios that are wet and warm will cause the largest reduction in terrestrial CH4 uptake across ecosystem types.

Keywords

soil methane oxidation methanotrophy climate change rainfall manipulation experimental warming elevation gradient 

References

  1. Bender M, Conrad R. 1992. Kinetics of CH4 oxidation in oxic soils exposed to ambient air or high CH4 mixing ratios. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 101:261–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bender M, Conrad R. 1993. Kinetics of methane oxidation in oxic soils. Chemosphere 26:687–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benstead J, King GM. 1997. Response of methanotrophic activity in forest soil to methane availability. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 23:333–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Billings SA, Richter DD, Yarie J. 2000. Sensitivity of soil methane fluxes to reduced precipitation in boreal forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem 32:1431–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blankinship JC, Brown JR, Dijkstra P, Hungate BA. 2010. Effects of interactive global changes on methane uptake in an annual grassland. J Geophys Res 115:G02008. doi:10.1029/2009JG001097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borken W, Brumme R, Xu YJ. 2000. Effects of prolonged soil drought on CH4 oxidation in a temperate spruce forest. J Geophys Res 105:7079–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borken W, Davidson EA, Savage K, Sundquist ET, Steudler P. 2006. Effect of summer throughfall exclusion, summer drought, and winter snow cover on methane fluxes in a temperate forest soil. Soil Biol Biochem 38:1388–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Born M, Dörr H, Levin I. 1990. Methane consumption in aerated soils of the temperate zone. Tellus 42B:2–8.Google Scholar
  9. Bowden RD, Newkirk KM, Rullo GM. 1998. Carbon dioxide and methane fluxes by a forest soil under laboratory-controlled moisture and temperature conditions. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1591–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castro MS, Steudler PA, Melillo JM, Aber JD, Bowden RD. 1995. Factors controlling atmospheric methane consumption by temperate forest soils. Global Biogeochem Cycles 9:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Christensen JH, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gao X, Held I, Jones R, Kolli RK, Kwon WT, Laprise R, Magaña Rueda V, Mearns L, Menéndez CG, Räisänen J, Rinke A, Sarr A, Whetton P. 2007. Regional climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL, Eds. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 847–940.Google Scholar
  12. Curry CL. 2007. Modeling the soil consumption of atmospheric methane at the global scale. Global Biogeochem Cycles 21:GB4012. doi:10.1029/2006GB002818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curry CL. 2009. The consumption of atmospheric methane by soil in a simulated future climate. Biogeosciences 6:2355–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Czepiel PM, Crill PM, Harriss RC. 1995. Environmental factors influencing the variability of methane oxidation in temperate zone soils. J Geophys Res 100:9359–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davidson EA, Ishida FY, Nepstad DC. 2004. Effects of an experimental drought on soil emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and nitric oxide in a moist tropical forest. Global Change Biol 10:718–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dutaur L, Verchot LV. 2007. A global inventory of the soil CH4 sink. Global Biogeochem Cycles 21:4013. doi:10.1029/2006GB002734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gulledge J, Schimel JP. 1998. Moisture control over atmospheric CH4 consumption and CO2 production in diverse Alaskan soils. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1127–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gulledge J, Hrywna Y, Cavanaugh C, Steudler PA. 2004. Effects of long-term nitrogen fertilization on the uptake kinetics of atmospheric methane in temperate forest soils. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 49:389–400.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hart SC. 2006. Potential impacts of climate change on nitrogen transformations and greenhouse gas fluxes in forests: a soil transfer study. Global Change Biol 12:1032–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hutchinson GL, Mosier AR. 1981. Improved soil cover method for field measurements of nitrous oxide fluxes. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45:311–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Itoh M, Ohte N, Koba K. 2009. Methane flux characteristics in forest soils under an East Asian monsoon climate. Soil Biol Biochem 41:388–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. King GM. 1997. Responses of atmospheric methane consumption by soils to global climate change. Global Change Biol 3:351–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. King GM, Adamsen APS. 1992. Effects of temperature on methane consumption in a forest soil and in pure cultures of the methanotroph Methylomonas rubra. Appl Environ Microbiol 58:2758–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Koschorreck M, Conrad R. 1993. Oxidation of atmospheric methane in soil: measurements in the field, in soil cores and in soil samples. Global Biogeochem Cycles 7:109–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nesbit SP, Breitenbeck GA. 1992. A laboratory study of factors influencing methane uptake by soils. Agric Ecosyst Environ 41:39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peterjohn WT, Melillo JM, Steudler PA, Newkirk KM, Bowles FP, Aber JD. 1994. Responses of trace gas fluxes and N availability to experimentally elevated soil temperatures. Ecol Appl 4:617–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Potter CS, Davidson EA, Verchot LV. 1996. Estimation of global biogeochemical controls and seasonality in soil methane consumption. Chemosphere 32:2219–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rustad LE, Fernandez IJ. 1998. Experimental soil warming effects on CO2 and CH4 flux from a low elevation spruce-fir forest soil in Maine, USA. Global Change Biol 4:597–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sjögersten S, Wookey PA. 2002. Spatio-temporal variability and environmental controls of methane fluxes at the forest-tundra ecotone in the Fennoscandian mountains. Global Change Biol 8:885–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Striegl RG. 1993. Diffusional limits to the consumption of atmospheric methane by soils. Chemosphere 26:715–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Striegl RG, McConnaughey TA, Thorstenson DC, Weeks EP, Woodward JC. 1992. Consumption of atmospheric methane by desert soils. Nature 357:145–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Torn MS, Harte J. 1996. Methane consumption by montane soils: implications for positive and negative feedback with climatic change. Biogeochemistry 32:53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yahdjian L, Sala OE. 2002. A rainout shelter design for intercepting different amounts of rainfall. Oecologia 133:95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph C. Blankinship
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jamie R. Brown
    • 1
  • Paul Dijkstra
    • 1
  • Michael C. Allwright
    • 1
    • 3
  • Bruce A. Hungate
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA
  2. 2.School of Natural Sciences and Sierra Nevada Research InstituteUniversity of CaliforniaMercedUSA
  3. 3.Merriam-Powell Center for Environmental ResearchNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA

Personalised recommendations