the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The limited effect of deforestation on stabilized subsoil organic carbon in a subtropical catchment
Claude Raoul Müller
Johan Six
Liesa Brosens
Philipp Baumann
Jean Paolo Gomes Minella
Gerard Govers
Marijn Van de Broek
Abstract. Predicting the quantity of soil organic carbon (SOC) requires understanding about how different factors control the amount of SOC. Land use has a major influence on the function of the soil as a carbon sink, as shown by substantial organic carbon (OC) losses from the soil upon deforestation. Yet, predicting the degree to which land use change affects the SOC content, and the depth down to which this occurs, requires context-specific information related to, for example, climate, geochemistry, and land use history. In this study, soil samples collected down to 300 cm depth from forests and agricultural fields in a subtropical region (Arvorhezina, southern Brazil) were used to study the impact of land use on the amount of stabilized OC along the soil profile. We found that the stabilized SOC content was not affected by land use below a depth of 90 cm. Along the soil profile, the amount of stabilized OC was predominantly controlled by land use and depth, in addition to the silt and clay content, and aluminum ion concentrations. Below 100 cm, none of the soil profiles reached a concentration of stabilized SOC above 50 % of stabilized SOC saturation point (i.e., the maximum OC concentration that can physically be stabilized in these soils). Based on these results, we argue that it is unlikely that deeper soil layers can serve as an OC sink over a time scale relevant to global climate change, due to limited OC input in these depth layers. Furthermore, we found that soil weathering degree was not a relevant control on the amount of stabilized SOC in the profiles we investigated, because of the high weathering degree of the studied soils. It is therefore suggested that while the soil weathering degree might be an effective controlling factor of OC stabilization over large spatial scale, it is not an informative measure for this process at the scale of the soil profile in highly weathered soils.
- Preprint
(2686 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1786 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Claude Raoul Müller et al.
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2170', Anonymous Referee #1, 17 Nov 2023
reply
In this manuscript, authors evaluated the different of stabilized soil organic carbon (SOC) between forest and agricultural field along the profile down to 3 m in a subtropical catchment. Authors found that stabilized SOC content was not affected by land use below 90 cm, indicating a limited effect of deforestation on stabilized SOC in deep soil. Therefore, authors suggested that deeper soil layer is unlikely to serve as SOC sink for climate mitigation. Authors also found that stabilized SOC was predominantly controlled by land use, depth, silt and clay, and aluminium ion, while soil weathering degree was not relevant. The results support authors’ hypothesis that the difference of stabilized SOC between forest and agricultural field below 100 cm depth. While it should be noted that this conclusion only remains valid for the regions with highly weather soils in subtropical regions. This manuscript is generally well written with clear objectives, solid methodology and insightful discussion which meets the requirement for the publication in SOIL. Therefore, several issues still need to be addressed before publication.
Line 12: Please either use SOC or OC throughout the manuscript since they share the same meaning in this manuscript.
Line 16: Please indicate how many soil profiles (and soil samples) were used in this study.
Lines 26-27: at the scale of the soil profile? It is not clear.
Line 51: soil organic carbon can be replaced by SOC.
Lines 68-69: Please address the recent MEMS 2.0 model that uses measured SOC fractions for modelling.
Zhang, Y., Lavallee, J.M., Robertson, A.D., Even, R., Ogle, S.M., Paustian, K. and Cotrufo, M.F., 2021. Simulating measurable ecosystem carbon and nitrogen dynamics with the mechanistically defined MEMS 2.0 model. Biogeosciences, 18(10), pp.3147-3171.
Line 75: vegetation(Cotrufo The space is missing here.
Line 80: Is it necessary to separate SOC from TOC? If they have the some meaning, then the use of SOC would be enough.
Line 85: silt (soil particles in 2- 53 μm) would be better.
Line 95: (Alcántara 95 et al., 2016) the font for this text is different from others. Please correct it.
Lines 143-144: I expect to have more information about the approach for soil sampling design. And there you should indicate how many soil profiles were collected not just the number of soil samples.
Lines 158-159: How you get the information of weathering degree before laboratory analysis for choosing the sites for laboratory analysis? More detailed information is needed.
Lines 227: Grain size is rarely used, please use particle size instead. Then the use of silt (2-53 μm) and sand (53-2000 μm) would be clearer.
Lines 239-240: A big concern here is that MIR technique tends to overestimate the low value while underestimate the high value, even the model performance is high. As a result, the high MAOC under forest soil would be underestimated, which potentially leads a close result to the MAOC under agricultural field. I think authors should carefully address this issue in the discussion.
Figure 2: How you conduct the paired comparison at a given depth interval since all the soil profiles were collected from genetic horizons?
Figure 4: The unit is needed for S&C fractions in the x axis. Please also provide the linear equation here.
Line 378: The effect of land use.
Lines 395-397: What are the potential reasons for the difference between this study and previous studies?
Lines 486-487: why 0-20, 25-50 and 45-90 cm were selected here, instead of 0-20, 20-50, 50-90 cm?
Lines 489-490: Maximum potential of SOC is predicted by silt+clay, therefore there is no doubt that silt and clay are important.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2170-RC1
Claude Raoul Müller et al.
Claude Raoul Müller et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
146 | 54 | 8 | 208 | 15 | 6 | 6 |
- HTML: 146
- PDF: 54
- XML: 8
- Total: 208
- Supplement: 15
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1