Standing Dead Trees: a Conduit for the Atmospheric Flux of Greenhouse Gases from Wetlands?
- 337 Downloads
Wetlands represent the largest natural source of methane flux to the atmosphere, which can occur across the sediment/water/plant-atmosphere interface. Of these three potential methane sources, the role of vegetation in this flux is the least well understood. Both living and dead herbaceous vegetation have been demonstrated to act as methane sources, while knowledge regarding the contribution of woody vegetation to this flux is restricted to live plants. For dead woody vegetation to act as a methane source, two conditions must occur: (1) gas evolution/accumulation within the trunk airspace of a dead tree (e.g. snag) and (2) flux of this gas across the plant-atmosphere interface. The research presented here investigates condition (1) and provides evidence for a significant accumulation of both CH4 and CO2 in trunk airspace at water level (104.4 ± 19.0 and 1785.5 ± 470.7 μL L−1 for CH4 and CO2 respectively) and CO2 at breast height (1257.6 ± 294.4 μL L−1) as compared to ambient air immediately outside the trunk (ca. 3 and 370 μL L−1 for CH4 and CO2 respectively) in dead snags located within two ghost forest landscapes at the Timberlake Observatory for Wetland Restoration (Tyrrell County, North Carolina). A more finely resolved understanding of this potential pathway for methane flux to the atmosphere is important given the predicted increase in dead carbon stocks within coastal wetland ecosystems, as global climate change can lead to the conversion of these ecosystems into ghost forest landscapes.
KeywordsDead vegetation Wetlands Carbon cycle Methane Decomposition Gas transport
The authors would like to thank Marcelo Ardón, Emily Bernhardt, Suzanna Bräuer, Ashley Helton, and Joseph White for advice and helpful discussion, Sean Taylor for field assistance, and Brooke Hassett (Duke River Center) for assistance with gas chromatography. Support was provided for M.J. Carmichael by the Charles H. Babcock Foundation and by a Vecellio Award for Graduate Research from Wake Forest University.
- Ciais P, Sabine C, Bala G, Bopp L, Brovkin V, Canadell JG, Chhabra A, DeFries R, Galloway J, Heimann M, Jones C, Le Quéré C, Myneni RB, Piao S, and Thornton P (2013) Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattne GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, and Midgley PM (eds.), Climate Change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribtion of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmnetal Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge UP, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
- Gilbert S, Lackstrom K, Tufford D (2012) The impact of drought on coastal ecosystems in the Carolinas. Research Report: CISA-2012-01. Columbia, SC: Carolinas Integrated Sciences and AssessmentsGoogle Scholar
- Hook DD (1984) Adaptations to flooding with freshwater. In: Kozlowski TT (ed) Flooding and Plant Growth. Academic Press, New YorK, p 356Google Scholar
- Kirschke S, Bousquet P, Ciais P, Saunois M, Canadell JG, Dlugokencky EJ, Bergamaschi P, Bergmann D, Blake DR, Buruhwiler L, Cameron-Smith P, Castaldi S, Chevallier F, Feng L, Fraser A, Heimann M, Hodson EL, Houweling S, Josse B, Fraser PJ, Krummel PB, Lamarque JF, Langenfelds RL, Le Quére C, Naik V, O’Doherty S, Palmer PI, Pison I, Plummer D, Poulter B, Prinn RG, Stelle LP, Strode SA, Sudo K, Szopa S, van der Werf GR, Voulgarakis A, van Weele M, Weiss RF, Williams JE, Zeng G (2013) Three decades of global methane sources and sinks. Nature Geoscience 6:813–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses of woody plants to flooding and salinity. Tree Physiology Monograph 1:1–29Google Scholar
- Melillo JM, Richmond T, Yohe GW, eds (2014) Climate change impacts in the United States: the third national climate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 841 ppGoogle Scholar
- Myhre G, Shindell DT, Breon FM, Collins W, Fuglestvelt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque JF, Lee D, Mendoza B, Nakajima, T, Robock A, Stephens G, Takemura T, Zhang H (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: Stoker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds.) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
- Needham R (2006) Implementation plan for agricultural restoration at Timberlake Farms. Needham Environmental Incorporated, WilmingtonGoogle Scholar
- Saleska SR, Miller SD, Matross DM, Goulden ML, Wofsy SC, da Rocha HR, de Camargo PB, Crill P, Daube BC, de Freitas HC, Hutyra L, Keller M, Kirchhoff V, Menton M, Munger JW, Pyle EH, Rice AG, Silva H (2003) Carbon in Amazon forests: unexpected seasonal fluxes and disturbance-induced losses. Science 302:1554–1557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schlesinger WH, Bernhardt ES (2013) Biogoechemistry: an analysis of global change, 3rd edn. Elsevier, WalthamGoogle Scholar
- Sebacher DI, Harriss RC, Bartlett KB (1985) Methane emissions to the atmosphere through aquatic plants. Journal of Environmental Quality 14:40–46Google Scholar