4.7 Article

Soil carbon and nitrogen availability are key determinants of soil microbial biomass and respiration in forests along urbanized rivers of southern China

Journal

URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING
Volume 43, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.05.013

Keywords

Riparian forest ecosystems; Soil microbial activities; Terrestrial biogeochemical processes; Soil nutrient availability; Urban coastal rivers

Funding

  1. National Key Project of Research and Development Plan of China [2017YFD0601200]
  2. International Cooperation Project of Fujian Province [2017I0001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although soil microbial communities have been known to play integral roles in most terrestrial biogeochemical processes, surprisingly the patterns and controls of soil microbial communities across urban forest ecosystems are poorly understood. To contribute towards addressing this critical gap, we examined the patterns of soil microbial properties and the effects of soil chemical properties on these patterns in forest ecosystems along the two rivers with different urbanization levels in the coastal city of Fuzhou in southern China. Soil microbial biomass C (MBC), microbial biomass N (MBN) and soil microbial respiration rate (SR) significantly decreased from the highly urbanized Bailongjiang River (BJR) to the less urbanized Wulongjiang River (WJR) and from the 0 - 10 cm soil depth to the 10 - 20 cm soil depth. Soil MBC/MBN and metabolic quotient (qCO(2)) values in BJR forest stands were not considerably different from those of WJR forest stands. Soil C and N availability determined soil MBC and MBN patterns and these four aforementioned soil variables determined SR patterns across the rivers and soil depths. Our study contributes to a better understanding of the patterns and controls of soil microbes and their activities in forest ecosystems with different urbanization levels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available