Soil Carbon Conservation in Anoxic Microsites in 'Natural Vegetation Land' Was Higher Than in 'Artificially Managed Land'

IF 3.8 2区 农林科学 Q2 SOIL SCIENCE
XuSheng Zhang, Xia Wang, YunFei Zhao, Jia Li, MengHan Yuan, LiuJun Li, YaZhen Li, YaRong Zhang
{"title":"Soil Carbon Conservation in Anoxic Microsites in 'Natural Vegetation Land' Was Higher Than in 'Artificially Managed Land'","authors":"XuSheng Zhang,&nbsp;Xia Wang,&nbsp;YunFei Zhao,&nbsp;Jia Li,&nbsp;MengHan Yuan,&nbsp;LiuJun Li,&nbsp;YaZhen Li,&nbsp;YaRong Zhang","doi":"10.1111/ejss.70201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Anoxic microsites in soil may lead to oxygen limitation even in well-aerated upland soils, which consequently impedes the rate of soil carbon loss. Nonetheless, the influence of various land use types on the carbon conservation potential within anoxic microsites, which is referred to here as 'anoxic protection', remains poorly understood. This investigation categorizes four land use types on upland soil into two groups based on the level of human influence, with natural shrubland and natural grassland classified as 'natural vegetation land' and farmland and planted forest designated as 'artificially managed land'. The extent of anoxic protection (EAP), which quantifies the contribution of anoxic microsites to soil organic carbon (SOC) preservation, was determined by assessing carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) efflux rates before and after aeration during soil incubation assays, with gas chromatography serving as the measurement technique. The EAP was 33.5% and 36% of natural shrubland and natural grassland, respectively. Planted forest exhibited a lower protection value at 15.9%, while farmland exhibited the most negligible anoxic protection at −8.9%, which is presumed to be due to agricultural practice-induced soil disruptions. In upland soils, the EAP was positively associated with anoxic bacterial activity, while methanogen DNA abundance was inversely correlated with the oxygen diffusion capacity. The findings indicate that a stable physical soil structure is essential for strong anoxic protection. Even in natural grasslands, where oxygen availability is ample, anoxic microsites enhance the activity of anoxic bacteria and reduce CO<sub>2</sub> emissions by over one-third compared to a fully aerobic environment, thereby offering increased protection for organic matter susceptible to decomposition under aerobic conditions.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12043,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Soil Science","volume":"76 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Soil Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://bsssjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejss.70201","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anoxic microsites in soil may lead to oxygen limitation even in well-aerated upland soils, which consequently impedes the rate of soil carbon loss. Nonetheless, the influence of various land use types on the carbon conservation potential within anoxic microsites, which is referred to here as 'anoxic protection', remains poorly understood. This investigation categorizes four land use types on upland soil into two groups based on the level of human influence, with natural shrubland and natural grassland classified as 'natural vegetation land' and farmland and planted forest designated as 'artificially managed land'. The extent of anoxic protection (EAP), which quantifies the contribution of anoxic microsites to soil organic carbon (SOC) preservation, was determined by assessing carbon dioxide (CO2) efflux rates before and after aeration during soil incubation assays, with gas chromatography serving as the measurement technique. The EAP was 33.5% and 36% of natural shrubland and natural grassland, respectively. Planted forest exhibited a lower protection value at 15.9%, while farmland exhibited the most negligible anoxic protection at −8.9%, which is presumed to be due to agricultural practice-induced soil disruptions. In upland soils, the EAP was positively associated with anoxic bacterial activity, while methanogen DNA abundance was inversely correlated with the oxygen diffusion capacity. The findings indicate that a stable physical soil structure is essential for strong anoxic protection. Even in natural grasslands, where oxygen availability is ample, anoxic microsites enhance the activity of anoxic bacteria and reduce CO2 emissions by over one-third compared to a fully aerobic environment, thereby offering increased protection for organic matter susceptible to decomposition under aerobic conditions.

Abstract Image

“自然植被地”缺氧微生境土壤碳保持力高于“人工管理地”
即使在通风良好的山地土壤中,土壤中的缺氧微位点也可能导致氧气限制,从而阻碍土壤碳损失的速度。尽管如此,各种土地利用类型对缺氧微站点内碳保护潜力的影响,在这里被称为“缺氧保护”,仍然知之甚少。本次调查根据人类影响程度,将旱地土壤的四种土地利用类型分为两类,将天然灌丛和天然草地归为“天然植被地”,将农田和人工林归为“人工经营地”。缺氧保护程度(EAP)量化了缺氧微生物位点对土壤有机碳(SOC)保存的贡献,通过评估土壤培养试验中曝气前后的二氧化碳(CO2)流出率来确定,并采用气相色谱法作为测量技术。天然灌丛和天然草地的EAP分别为33.5%和36%。人工林表现出较低的保护价值,为15.9%,而农田表现出最可忽略不计的缺氧保护价值,为- 8.9%,这被认为是由于农业实践引起的土壤破坏。在旱地土壤中,EAP与缺氧细菌活性呈正相关,而甲烷菌DNA丰度与氧扩散能力呈负相关。研究结果表明,稳定的土壤物理结构对强缺氧保护至关重要。即使在氧气供应充足的天然草原上,与完全有氧环境相比,缺氧微生物位点也能提高缺氧细菌的活性,减少超过三分之一的二氧化碳排放,从而为有氧条件下易分解的有机物提供更好的保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Soil Science
European Journal of Soil Science 农林科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
117
审稿时长
5 months
期刊介绍: The EJSS is an international journal that publishes outstanding papers in soil science that advance the theoretical and mechanistic understanding of physical, chemical and biological processes and their interactions in soils acting from molecular to continental scales in natural and managed environments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信