Partitioning Soil Respiration

 

 

Home

Introduction

Traditional Methods

Isotopic Methods

New Directions

References

About the Authors


Traditional Methods of Separating Respiration Components

Traditional methods for separating soil and root respiration have usually involved physical separation of the two sources. Hanson et al. (2000) broadly categorized these techniques as component integration and root exclusion.

Component Integration

Component integration of soil respiration involves calculating the individual contributions of each belowground source of CO2 and summing based on weight. Roots and litter are typically removed from soil samples and respiration rates of each are measured.

Component integration can be a relatively simple technique in estimating root and soil respiration. In situations where in situ measurements are not possible, it may be feasible to estimate or model respiration by measuring soil bulk density and root mass by species, if species- and site-specific respiration values are known. These results should be verifiable by comparing them to total soil respiration over a sufficient integration time.

Vose and Ryan (2002) used an infrared gas analyzer with custom foam-sealed Lexan cuvettes to measure respiration from white pine (Pinus strobus) roots directly. Roots near the soil surface were exposed by removing the litter layer and washed free of soil with deionized water. Roots were not detached from the tree during analysis. New sets of fine roots were exposed and measured during each monthly measurement, while coarse roots were fitted with permanent chambers. Root respiration rates were only compared to foliage and woody tissue, but not soil respiration rates.

Burton et al. (1997) found that sugar maple (Acer saccharum) root respiration rates measured in vitro decreased with increasing CO2 concentrations. CO2 concentrations were controlled with an open system IRGA and an O2 electrode cuvette. Respiration rates decreased sharply from 350 ppm but leveled off at CO2 concentrations higher than 3000 ppm. Root respiration measurements made at near-atmospheric CO2 concentrations are likely overestimate actual respiration by about 39%. While these results supported previous efforts, the mechanism for root respiration inhibition is still uncertain.

To compensate for higher concentrations of CO2 in the soil than in the cuvettes, Vose and Ryan used a correction factor of 1/2.5 for fine root respiration measurements. Accounting for soil CO2 concentrations is an important consideration; however, use of correction factors could be avoided my making use of a portable IRGA device that can control CO2 concentrations within the cuvette.

Perhaps the biggest disadvantage of the component integration method is that separation of the roots and litter from the soil is a serious disturbance to the natural matrix. Removal of litter alters soil moisture, microbial species composition, and gas diffusivity. In vitro analysis of root tissue requires cutting the root from the tree, while in situ measurements can be made with portable equipment. This process can also drastically alter the rhizosphere environment. (Hanson et al. 2000) Experiments must allow for adequate time for disturbed roots and soil to equilibrate after disturbance, but should be analyzed before desiccation or death occurs. Rustad (2000) also notes that spatial and temporal variations lead to potential problems with scaling-up from chamber experiments, to the stand, ecosystem, or global level.

Root Exclusion Experiments

Experiments using root exclusion compares respiration measurements taken from soil with and without living roots. The primary method of root exclusion experiments involves trenching and physically excluding new root growth into sample plots. In the gap formation method, vegetation is cleared or killed and the vegetation-free soil is compared to similar, undisturbed soil.

Trenching

Trenching with root exclusion is a straightforward approach to measure soil respiration without roots on relatively undisturbed soil using standard surface flux techniques. It can be applied in a variety of ecosystems, although may require extensive labor and root barriers in locations with deep soil.

Bowden et al. (1992) set up a series of 3 x 3 m plots in an 80-year-old hardwood stand in Harvard Forest. Trenches were dug 0.5 m outside of their plots to a depth of 70-100 cm (20 cm below the rooting depth) and roots were excluded with corrugated fiberglass sheets. Root respiration was calculated by subtracting annual CO2 fluxes from the no-root plots from control plots. Root contribution to total soil respiration was found to be 33% or 123 g C m-2 year -1. This study assumed that root respiration is a constant proportion of the total respiration throughout the year. Decomposition of the severed roots was not differentiated from soil respiration in the no-root plots. If the rate of decay of these roots is higher than soil, these results may underestimate the total contribution of root respiration. The authors acknowledged this factor, but noted other studies in which analysis of severed roots suggested that carbon in dead roots does not turnover rapidly.

Buchanann (2000) ran a series of root exclusion experiments with staggered start times, allowing for the comparison between recently cut roots and roots that had been dead for up to 6 months. Results showed that soil respiration collars (10 cm deep, 10 cm internal diameter) for a portable IRGA system installed 24 hours prior to sampling were 20 to 30% higher than collars that had been installed from 1 to 6 months earlier. No significant difference in respiration rates was seen in collars installed between 1 and 6 months earlier, suggesting that respiration rates stabilized shortly after the initial disturbance. One possible explanation for the high initial rates of decomposition that Buchanann does not propose is that organic matter around the rhizosphere (including fine roots, micorrhizae, soil microorganisms, and labile organic matter) continues to contribute to surface flux shortly after killing the root (< 1 month).

Root exclusion experiments also involve disturbance to the soil, although since larger plots can be used, the severity is arguably less. Hanson et al. (2000) suggest that when transpiration ceases after root exclusion soil moisture may increase, ultimately leading to altered heterotrophic respiration rates depending upon preexisting soil moisture conditions. Gap experiments that remove a substantial portion of the canopy can change the radiative balance of the soil. Canopy removal results in increased incoming shortwave radiation and leads to increased soil temperature during the day but traps less longwave radiation, leading to colder temperatures at night. Since much of respiration occurs in the upper organic layers, temperature changes can affect respiration rates.

Root exclusion experiments also involve disturbance to the soil, although since larger plots can be used, the severity is arguably less. Hanson et al. (2000) suggest that when transpiration ceases after root exclusion, soil moisture may increase, ultimately leading to altered heterotrophic respiration rates depending upon preexisting soil moisture conditions. As noted in the precious section on component integration, applying the results from these small-scale experiments to larger scales comes with sizable uncertainty.

Gap Formation

Gap formation experiments do not seem to be as common as root exclusion, possibly because of the severe disturbance typically involved. Scale of clearing is an obvious consideration when assessing gap results. The labor required for large scale gaps in forests can be very large (unless the study follows a disturbance such as windthrow or logging), while small scale grassland experiments may be ideal for this technique.

Hanson et al. (2000) describes several experiments using 30 m gaps that set out to compare vegetation-free soil with nearby vegetated soil. Deforested plots were shaded and moisture controlled, to some extent. Respiration rates of roots ranged from 40% to 51%, but may have contained a significant contribution by the dead roots.

Smaller gap sizes were used in a study by Ohashi et al. (2000) in an attempt to minimize alteration of soil properties. The authors cleared four Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) trees to create a 2.5 x 2.5 m plot and measured respiration with an open system IRGA. Respiration rates at the cleared plot did not differ significantly during the first year and decreased by year two, suggesting that stored carbohydrates and fine roots decomposed over the first year, maintaining high total soil respiration. Root respiration accounted for 57% of total soil respiration over the year. Monthly measurements illustrated a seasonal trend of higher proportionate rates of root respiration in the summer and lower rates in the winter.

Gap experiments represent an attempt to examine respiration on a larger scale than chambers or cuvettes are able to do. However, experimentation in vegetation changes at this scale must be carefully designed and maintained to minimize effects on soil temperature and moisture. Gap experiments that remove a substantial portion of the canopy can change the radiative balance of the soil. Canopy removal results in increased incoming shortwave radiation and leads to increased soil temperature during the day but traps less longwave radiation, leading to colder temperatures at night. Since much of respiration occurs in the upper organic layers, temperature changes can affect respiration rates. Large scale gap studies are useful methods in quantifying respiration changes after disturbance or land use change, but present many potential problems and confounding factors. Reported respiration rates from recently clearcut forests range from no significant change to twice that of control plots (Raich and Schlesinger 1992).


Home Introduction Background Traditional Methods Isotopic Methods New Directions References About the Authors

Biology 265 Duke Biology Home Duke Ecology Duke University