Blog
About

6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found
      Is Open Access

      Warming enhances sedimentation and decomposition of organic carbon in shallow macrophyte-dominated systems with zero net effect on carbon burial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A meta-analysis of the response of soil respiration, net nitrogen mineralization, and aboveground plant growth to experimental ecosystem warming

          Climate change due to greenhouse gas emissions is predicted to raise the mean global temperature by 1.0-3.5°C in the next 50-100 years. The direct and indirect effects of this potential increase in temperature on terrestrial ecosystems and ecosystem processes are likely to be complex and highly varied in time and space. The Global Change and Terrestrial Ecosystems core project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme has recently launched a Network of Ecosystem Warming Studies, the goals of which are to integrate and foster research on ecosystem-level effects of rising temperature. In this paper, we use meta-analysis to synthesize data on the response of soil respiration, net N mineralization, and aboveground plant productivity to experimental ecosystem warming at 32 research sites representing four broadly defined biomes, including high (latitude or altitude) tundra, low tundra, grassland, and forest. Warming methods included electrical heat-resistance ground cables, greenhouses, vented and unvented field chambers, overhead infrared lamps, and passive night-time warming. Although results from individual sites showed considerable variation in response to warming, results from the meta-analysis showed that, across all sites and years, 2-9 years of experimental warming in the range 0.3-6.0°C significantly increased soil respiration rates by 20% (with a 95% confidence interval of 18-22%), net N mineralization rates by 46% (with a 95% confidence interval of 30-64%), and plant productivity by 19% (with a 95% confidence interval of 15-23%). The response of soil respiration to warming was generally larger in forested ecosystems compared to low tundra and grassland ecosystems, and the response of plant productivity was generally larger in low tundra ecosystems than in forest and grassland ecosystems. With the exception of aboveground plant productivity, which showed a greater positive response to warming in colder ecosystems, the magnitude of the response of these three processes to experimental warming was not generally significantly related to the geographic, climatic, or environmental variables evaluated in this analysis. This underscores the need to understand the relative importance of specific factors (such as temperature, moisture, site quality, vegetation type, successional status, land-use history, etc.) at different spatial and temporal scales, and suggests that we should be cautious in "scaling up" responses from the plot and site level to the landscape and biome level. Overall, ecosystem-warming experiments are shown to provide valuable insights on the response of terrestrial ecosystems to elevated temperature.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Influences of species, latitudes and methodologies on estimates of phenological response to global warming

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Lakes as sentinels of climate change.

              While there is a general sense that lakes can act as sentinels of climate change, their efficacy has not been thoroughly analyzed. We identified the key response variables within a lake that act as indicators of the effects of climate change on both the lake and the catchment. These variables reflect a wide range of physical, chemical, and biological responses to climate. However, the efficacy of the different indicators is affected by regional response to climate change, characteristics of the catchment, and lake mixing regimes. Thus, particular indicators or combinations of indicators are more effective for different lake types and geographic regions. The extraction of climate signals can be further complicated by the influence of other environmental changes, such as eutrophication or acidification, and the equivalent reverse phenomena, in addition to other land-use influences. In many cases, however, confounding factors can be addressed through analytical tools such as detrending or filtering. Lakes are effective sentinels for climate change because they are sensitive to climate, respond rapidly to change, and integrate information about changes in the catchment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Global Change Biology
                Glob Change Biol
                Wiley
                13541013
                November 2018
                November 2018
                August 17 2018
                : 24
                : 11
                : 5231-5242
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Aquatic Ecology; Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW); Wageningen The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Ecosystem Research; Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries; Berlin Germany
                [3 ]Department of Aquatic Ecology and Environmental Biology; Institute for Water and Wetland Research; Radboud University Nijmegen; Nijmegen The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management; Wageningen University; Wageningen The Netherlands
                [5 ]Ecology & Biodiversity Group; Department of Biology; Utrecht University; Utrecht The Netherlands
                Article
                10.1111/gcb.14387
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                Comments

                Comment on this article