scholarly journals Control of soil N cycle processes byPteridium aquilinumandErica cinereain heathlands along a pH gradient

Ecosphere ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e02426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clément Bardon ◽  
Boris Misery ◽  
Florence Piola ◽  
Franck Poly ◽  
Xavier Le Roux
Keyword(s):  
Soil N ◽  
N Cycle ◽  
SOIL ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 235-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. W. van Groenigen ◽  
D. Huygens ◽  
P. Boeckx ◽  
Th. W. Kuyper ◽  
I. M. Lubbers ◽  
...  

Abstract. The study of soil N cycling processes has been, is, and will be at the centre of attention in soil science research. The importance of N as a nutrient for all biota; the ever-increasing rates of its anthropogenic input in terrestrial (agro)ecosystems; its resultant losses to the environment; and the complexity of the biological, physical, and chemical factors that regulate N cycling processes all contribute to the necessity of further understanding, measuring, and altering the soil N cycle. Here, we review important insights with respect to the soil N cycle that have been made over the last decade, and present a personal view on the key challenges of future research. We identify three key challenges with respect to basic N cycling processes producing gaseous emissions: 1. quantifying the importance of nitrifier denitrification and its main controlling factors; 2. characterizing the greenhouse gas mitigation potential and microbiological basis for N2O consumption; 3. characterizing hotspots and hot moments of denitrification Furthermore, we identified a key challenge with respect to modelling: 1. disentangling gross N transformation rates using advanced 15N / 18O tracing models Finally, we propose four key challenges related to how ecological interactions control N cycling processes: 1. linking functional diversity of soil fauna to N cycling processes beyond mineralization; 2. determining the functional relationship between root traits and soil N cycling; 3. characterizing the control that different types of mycorrhizal symbioses exert on N cycling; 4. quantifying the contribution of non-symbiotic pathways to total N fixation fluxes in natural systems We postulate that addressing these challenges will constitute a comprehensive research agenda with respect to the N cycle for the next decade. Such an agenda would help us to meet future challenges on food and energy security, biodiversity conservation, water and air quality, and climate stability.


2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nunzio Fiorentino ◽  
Massimo Fagnano ◽  
Paola Adamo ◽  
Adriana Impagliazzo ◽  
Mauro Mori ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 278 ◽  
pp. 116852
Author(s):  
Xin Zhang ◽  
Guangmin Xiao ◽  
Roland Bol ◽  
Ligang Wang ◽  
Yuping Zhuge ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 623-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. W. van Groenigen ◽  
D. Huygens ◽  
P. Boeckx ◽  
T. W. Kuyper ◽  
I. M. Lubbers ◽  
...  

Abstract. The study of soil N cycling processes has been, is, and will be at the center of attention in soil science research. The importance of N as a nutrient for all biota; the ever increasing rates of its anthropogenic input in terrestrial (agro)ecosystems; its resultant losses to the environment; and the complexity of the biological, physical, and chemical factors that regulate N cycling processes all contribute to the necessity of further understanding, measurement and mitigation of the soil N cycle. Here, we review important insights with respect to the soil N cycle that have been made over the last decade, and present a personal view on the key challenges for future research (Fig. 1). We identified four key questions with respect to N cycling processes: 1. How large is the contribution of non-symbiotic N fixation in natural systems? 2. How important is nitrifier denitrification and what are its main controlling factors? 3. What is the greenhouse gas mitigation potential and microbiological basis for N2O consumption? 4. How can we characterize hot-spots and hot-moments of denitrification? Furthermore, we propose three questions about proximal controls on N cycling processes: 1. How does functional diversity of soil fauna affect N cycling beyond mineralization? 2. What is the functional relationship between root traits and soil N cycling? 3. To what extent do different types of mycorrhizal symbioses (differentially) affect N cycling? Finally, we identified a key challenge with respect to modelling: 1. How can advanced 15N/18O tracing models help us to better disentangle gross N transformation rates? We postulate that addressing these questions would constitute a comprehensive research agenda with respect to the N cycle for the next decade. Such an agenda would help us to meet future challenges on food and energy security, biodiversity conservation and climate stability.


2016 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 195-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenbin Ma ◽  
Shengjing Jiang ◽  
Féline Assemien ◽  
Mingsen Qin ◽  
Beibei Ma ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 426 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 211-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Liu ◽  
Yanhui Zhang ◽  
Benjuan Liu ◽  
James E. Amonette ◽  
Zhibin Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil N ◽  
N Cycle ◽  

2016 ◽  
Vol 95 ◽  
pp. 223-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Liz Hamilton ◽  
Mark Trimmer ◽  
Chris Bradley ◽  
Gilles Pinay
Keyword(s):  
Oil Palm ◽  
Soil N ◽  
N Cycle ◽  

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (13) ◽  
pp. 2771-2793 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J. Cheng ◽  
Peter G. Hess ◽  
William R. Wieder ◽  
R. Quinn Thomas ◽  
Knute J. Nadelhoffer ◽  
...  

Abstract. To accurately capture the impacts of nitrogen (N) on the land carbon (C) sink in Earth system models, model responses to both N limitation and ecosystem N additions (e.g., from atmospheric N deposition and fertilizer) need to be evaluated. The response of the land C sink to N additions depends on the fate of these additions: that is, how much of the added N is lost from the ecosystem through N loss pathways or recovered and used to increase C storage in plants and soils. Here, we evaluate the C–N dynamics of the latest version of a global land model, the Community Land Model version 5 (CLM5), and how they vary when ecosystems have large N inputs and losses (i.e., an open N cycle) or small N inputs and losses (i.e., a closed N cycle). This comparison allows us to identify potential improvements to CLM5 that would apply to simulated N cycles along the open-to-closed spectrum. We also compare the short- (< 3 years) and longer-term (5–17 years) N fates in CLM5 against observations from 13 long-term 15N tracer addition experiments at eight temperate forest sites. Simulations using both open and closed N cycles overestimated plant N recovery following N additions. In particular, the model configuration with a closed N cycle simulated that plants acquired more than twice the amount of added N recovered in 15N tracer studies on short timescales (CLM5: 46±12 %; observations: 18±12 %; mean across sites ±1 standard deviation) and almost twice as much on longer timescales (CLM5: 23±6 %; observations: 13±5 %). Soil N recoveries in simulations with closed N cycles were closer to observations in the short term (CLM5: 40±10 %; observations: 54±22 %) but smaller than observations in the long term (CLM5: 59±15 %; observations: 69±18 %). Simulations with open N cycles estimated similar patterns in plant and soil N recovery, except that soil N recovery was also smaller than observations in the short term. In both open and closed sets of simulations, soil N recoveries in CLM5 occurred from the cycling of N through plants rather than through direct immobilization in the soil, as is often indicated by tracer studies. Although CLM5 greatly overestimated plant N recovery, the simulated increase in C stocks to recovered N was not much larger than estimated by observations, largely because the model's assumed C:N ratio for wood was nearly half that suggested by measurements at the field sites. Overall, results suggest that simulating accurate ecosystem responses to changes in N additions requires increasing soil competition for N relative to plants and examining model assumptions of C:N stoichiometry, which should also improve model estimates of other terrestrial C–N processes and interactions.


1983 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 425-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. SCHNITZER ◽  
P. R. MARSHALL ◽  
D. A. HINDLE

Close to 50% of the total N in soils has so far not been identified. Previous studies indicate that this "unknown" N might be bio-available and may participate in the soil N cycle. The objective of this investigation was to develop a procedure which would allow us to isolate from soils, fractions which were rich in unknown N but which would contain only small amounts of known N compounds. We felt that the availability of such fractions would permit us to learn more about the characteristics of the unknown N components without too much interference from the many known N-containing constituents. The isolation procedure involved (a) the extraction and separation of humic (HA) and fulvic acid (FA) fractions from soils; (b) hydrolysis of each fraction with hot 6 mol∙L−1 HCl; (c) separation of neutralized hydrolyzates on Sephadex G-25 gel; and (d) further separation of the highest molecular weight fractions of the neutralized hydrolyzates on G-50 gel, and of the second highest molecular weight fractions on G-15 gel. For soil samples taken from the Ah horizon of the Bainsville soil (a Humic Gleysol) and the Bh horizon of the Armadale (a Podzol), proportions of soil-N in HAs and FAs, and in fractions derived from them were, in HAs + FAs, 29.3 and 56.9%; in water-soluble, hydrolyzed HA- and FA- fractions, 12.0 and 19.7%; and in nonhydrolyzable and water-insoluble (at pH 7) fractions, 9.0 and 16.3%, respectively. Substantial portions of the soil N were left unextracted in the humins. Several fractions were isolated by the procedure described herein; in some close to 98% of the total N consisted of unknown N. Key words: Amino acid nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, acid hydrolysis, gel filtration


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document