Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 251, Issue 2, pp 303–317 | Cite as

Soil and total ecosystem respiration in agricultural fields: effect of soil and crop type

  • Annalea Lohila
  • Mika Aurela
  • Kristiina Regina
  • Tuomas Laurila
Article

Abstract

A study was made of the effect of soil and crop type on the soil and total ecosystem respiration rates in agricultural soils in southern Finland. The main interest was to compare the soil respiration rates in peat and two different mineral soils growing barley, grass and potato. Respiration measurements were conducted during the growing season with (1) a closed-dynamic ecosystem respiration chamber, in which combined plant and soil respiration was measured and (2) a closed-dynamic soil respiration chamber which measured only the soil and root-derived respiration. A semi-empirical model including separate functions for the soil and plant respiration components was used for the total ecosystem respiration (TER), and the resulting soil respiration parameters for different soil and crop types were compared. Both methods showed that the soil respiration in the peat soil was 2–3 times as high as that in the mineral soils, varying from 0.11 to 0.36 mg (CO2) m−2 s−1 in the peat soil and from 0.02 to 0.17 mg (CO2) m−2 s−1 in the mineral soils. The difference between the soil types was mainly attributed to the soil organic C content, which in the uppermost 20 cm of the peat soil was 24 kg m−2, being about 4 times as high as that in the mineral soils. Depending on the measurement method, the soil respiration in the sandy soil was slightly higher than or similar to that in the clay soil. In each soil type, the soil respiration was highest on the grass plots. Higher soil respiration parameter values (Rs0, describing the soil respiration at a soil temperature of 10 °C, and obtained by modelling) were found on the barley than on the potato plots. The difference was explained by the different cultivation history of the plots, as the potato plots had lain fallow during the preceding summer. The total ecosystem respiration followed the seasonal evolution in the leaf area and measured photosynthetic flux rates. The 2–3-fold peat soil respiration term as compared to mineral soil indicates that the cultivated peat soil ecosystem is a strong net CO2 source.

mineral soil peat soil soil carbon content soil respiration total ecosystem respiration 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akinremi O O, McGinn S M, and McLean H D J 1999 Effects of soil temperature and moisture on soil respiration in barley and fallow plots. Can. J. Soil Sci. 79, 5–13.Google Scholar
  2. Alm J, Talanov A, Saarnio S, Silvola J, Ikkonen E, Aaltonen H, Nykänen H and Martikainen P J 1999a Reconstruction of the carbon balance for microsites in a boreal oligotrophic pine fen, Finland. Oecologia 110, 423–431.Google Scholar
  3. Alm J, Schulman L, Walden J, Nykänen H, Martikainen P J and Silvola J 1999b Carbon balance of a boreal bog during a year with an exceptionally dry summer. Ecology 80, 161–174.Google Scholar
  4. Andrews J A, Harrison K G, Matamala R and Schlesinger WH 1999 Separation of root respiration from total soil respiration using carbon-13 labeling during Free-Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment (FACE). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63, 1429–1435.Google Scholar
  5. Aurela M, Laurila T and Tuovinen J-P 1998 Carbon dioxide exchange in a subarctic peatland ecosystem in northern Europe measured by eddy covariance technique. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 11289–11301.Google Scholar
  6. Aurela M, Laurila T and Tuovinen J-P 2001a Net CO2 exchange of a subarctic mountain birch ecosystem. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 70, 135–148.Google Scholar
  7. Aurela M, Laurila T and Tuovinen J-P 2001b Seasonal CO2 balances of a subarctic mire. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 1623–1637.Google Scholar
  8. Baldocchi D 1994 A comparative study of mass and energy exchange rates over a closed C3 (wheat) and an open C4 (corn) crop: II. CO2 exchange and water use efficiency. Agric. For. Meteorol. 67, 291–231.Google Scholar
  9. Blake G R and Hartge K H 1986 Bulk Density. In Methods of soil analysis, Part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods, Second Edition, Ed. A Klute. pp. 363–382. American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Soil Science Society of America, Inc. Madison, WI, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Bouma T J and Bryla D R 2000 On the assessment of root and soil respiration for soils of different textures: interactions with soil moisture contents and soil CO2 concentrations. Plant Soil 227, 215–221.Google Scholar
  11. Bubier J L, Crill P M, Moore T R, Savage K and Varner R K 1998 Seasonal patterns and controls on net ecosystem CO2 exchange in a boreal peatland complex. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 12, 703–714.Google Scholar
  12. Buyanovsky G A, Wagner G H and Gantzer C J 1986 Soil respiration in a winter wheat ecosystem. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50, 338–344.Google Scholar
  13. Finnish Meteorological Institute 1991 Climatological Statistics in Finland 1961–1990, Supplement to the meteorological Yearbook of Finland, The Finn. Meteorol. Inst., Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  14. Franzluebbers K, Franzluebbers A J and Jawson M D 2002 Environmental controls on soil and whole-ecosystem respiration from a tallgrass prairie. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66, 254–262.Google Scholar
  15. Gent M P N and Kiyomoto R N 1992 Canopy photosynthesis and respiration in winter wheat adapted and unadapted to Connecticut. Crop Sci. 32, 425–431.Google Scholar
  16. Gorham E 1991 Northern peatlands: role in the carbon cycle and probable responses to climate warming. Ecol. Appl. 1, 182-195.Google Scholar
  17. Högberg P, Nordgren A, Buchmann N, Taylor A F S, Ekblad A, Högberg M N, Nyberg G, Ottosson-Löfvenius M and Read D J 2001 Large-scale forest girdling shows that current photosynthesis drives soil respiration. Nature 411, 789–792.Google Scholar
  18. Kim J, Verma S B and Clement R J 1992 Carbon dioxide budget in a temperate grassland ecosystem. J. Geophys. Res. 97, 6057–6063.Google Scholar
  19. Koizumi H, Kontturi M, Mariko S, Nakadai T, Bekku Y and Mela T 1999 Soil respiration in three soil types in agricultural ecosystems in Finland. Acta Agric. Scand., B: Soil Plant Sci. 49, 65–74.Google Scholar
  20. Kutsch W L and Kappen L 1997 Aspects of carbon and nitrogen cycling in soils of the Bornhöved Lake district II. Modelling the influence of temperature increase on soil respiration and organic carbon content in arable soils under different managements. Biogeochemistry 39, 207–224.Google Scholar
  21. Kuzyakov Y and Cheng W 2001 Photosynthesis controls of rhizosphere respiration and organic matter decomposition. Soil Biol. Biochem. 33, 1915–1925.Google Scholar
  22. La Scala N Jr., Marques J Jr., Pereira G T and Corá J E 2000 Carbon dioxide emission related to chemical properties of a tropical bare soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1469–1473.Google Scholar
  23. Le Dantec V, Epron D and Dufrêne E 1999 Soil CO2 efflux in a beech forest: comparison of two closed dynamic systems. Plant Soil 214, 125–132.Google Scholar
  24. Lloyd J and Taylor J A 1994 On the temperature dependence of soil respiration. Funct. Ecol. 8, 315–323.Google Scholar
  25. Maljanen M, Martikainen P J, Walden J and Silvola J 2001 CO2 exchange in an organic field growing barley or grass in eastern Finland. Global Change Biol. 7, 679–692.Google Scholar
  26. McCree K J 1974 Equations for the rate of dark respiration of white clover and grain sorghum, as functions of dry weight, photosynthetic rate, and temperature. Crop Sci. 14, 509–514.Google Scholar
  27. Myllys M 1996 Agriculture on peatlands. In Peatlands in Finland. Ed. H. Vasander. pp. 64–71. Finnish peatland society, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  28. Nykänen H, Alm J, Lång K, Silvola J and Martikainen P J 1995 Emissions of CH4, N2O and CO2 from a virgin fen and a fen drained for grassland in Finland. J. Biogeogr. 22, 351–357.Google Scholar
  29. Paustian K, Andrén O, Clarholm M, Hansson A-C, Johansson G, Lagerlöf J, Lindberg T, Pettersson R and Sohlenius B 1990 Carbon and nitrogen budgets of four agro-ecosystems with annual and perennial crops, with and without N fertilization. J. Appl. Ecol. 27, 60–84.Google Scholar
  30. Petrone R M, Waddington J M and Price J S 2001 Ecosystem scale evapotranspiration and net CO2 exchange from a restored peatland. Hydrol. Proc. 15, 2839–2845.Google Scholar
  31. Päivänen J 1982 Physical properties of the peat soil. (in Finnish, abstract in English) Publications from the Department of Peatland Forestry, 2, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
  32. Raich J W and Tufekcioglu A 2000 Vegetation and soil respiration: correlations and controls. Biogeochemistry 48, 71–90.Google Scholar
  33. Rochette P and Flanagan L B 1997 Quantifying rhizosphere respiration in a corn crop under field conditions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61, 466–474.Google Scholar
  34. Rochette P, Desjardins R L, Gregorich E G, Pattey E and Lessard R 1992 Soil respiration in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and fallow fields. Can. J. Soil Sci. 72, 591–603.Google Scholar
  35. Rochette P, Desjardins R L, Pattey E and Lessard R 1995 Crop net carbon dioxide exchange rate and radiation use efficiency in soybean. Agron. J. 87, 22–28.Google Scholar
  36. Schüssler W, Neubert R, Levin I and Fischer N 2000 Determination of microbial versus root-produced CO2 in an agricultural ecosystem by means of δ 13CO2 measurements in soil air. Tellus 52B, 909–918.Google Scholar
  37. Silvola J, Alm J, Ahlholm U, Nykänen H and Martikainen P J 1996a CO2 fluxes from peat in boreal mires under varying temperature and moisture conditions. J. Ecol. 84, 219–228.Google Scholar
  38. Silvola J, Alm J, Ahlholm U, Nykänen H and Martikainen P J 1996b The contribution of plant roots to CO2 fluxes from organic soils. Biol. Fertil. Soils 23, 126–131.Google Scholar
  39. Sundh I, Nilsson M, Mikkelä C, Granberg G and Svensson B H 2000 Fluxes of methane and carbon dioxide on peat-mining areas in Sweden. Ambio 29, 499–503.Google Scholar
  40. Suyker A E, Verma S B and Arkebauer T J 1997 Season-long measurement of carbon dioxide exchange in a boreal fen. J. Geophys. Res. 102, 29021–29028.Google Scholar
  41. Tufekcioglu A, Raich J W, Isenhart T M and Schultz R C 2001 Soil respiration within riparian buffers and adjacent crop fields. Plant Soil 229, 117–124.Google Scholar
  42. Tuittila E-S, Komulainen V-M, Vasander H and Laine J 1999 Restored cut-away peatland as a sink for atmospheric CO2. Oecologia 120, 563–574.Google Scholar
  43. Waddington J M and Warner K D 2001 Atmospheric CO2 sequestration in restored mined peatland. Ecoscience 8, 359–368.Google Scholar
  44. Waddington J M, Warner K D and Kennedy G W 2002 Cutover peatlands: a persistent source of atmospheric CO2. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 16 (1).Google Scholar
  45. Yli-Halla Mand Mokma D L 2001 Soils in an agricultural landscape of Jokioinen, south-western Finland. Agric. Food Sci. Finland 10, 33-43.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annalea Lohila
    • 1
  • Mika Aurela
    • 1
  • Kristiina Regina
    • 2
  • Tuomas Laurila
    • 1
  1. 1.Air Quality ResearchFinnish Meteorological InstituteHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Agrifood Research Finland, Soils and Environment, MTTJokioinenFinland

Personalised recommendations