Turnover of recently assimilated carbon in arctic bryophytes
Carbon (C) allocation and turnover in arctic bryophytes is largely unknown, but their response to climatic change has potentially significant impacts on arctic ecosystem C budgets. Using a combination of pulse-chase experiments and a newly developed model of C turnover in bryophytes, we show signifi...
Published in: | Oecologia |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Other Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Springer Verlag
2011
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3362 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-1988-y http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/3362/1/Street%20et%20al%202011_Oecologia.pdf |
Summary: | Carbon (C) allocation and turnover in arctic bryophytes is largely unknown, but their response to climatic change has potentially significant impacts on arctic ecosystem C budgets. Using a combination of pulse-chase experiments and a newly developed model of C turnover in bryophytes, we show significant differences in C turnover between two contrasting arctic moss species (Polytrichum piliferum and Sphagnum fuscum). 13C abundance in moss tissues (measured up to 1 year) and respired CO2 (traced over 5 days) were used to parameterise the bryophyte C model with four pools representing labile and structural C in photosynthetic and stem tissue. The model was optimised using an Ensemble Kalman Filter to ensure a focus on estimating the confidence intervals (CI) on model parameters and outputs. The ratio of aboveground NPP:GPP in Polytrichum piliferum was 23% (CI 9–35%), with an average turnover time of 1.7 days (CI 1.1–2.5 days). The aboveground NPP:GPP ratio in Sphagnum fuscum was 43% (CI 19–65%) with an average turnover time of 3.1 days (CI 1.6–6.1 days). These results are the first to show differences in C partitioning between arctic bryophyte species in situ and highlight the importance of modelling C dynamics of this group separately from vascular plants for a realistic representation of vegetation in arctic C models. |
---|