4.7 Review

Response of terrestrial nitrogen dynamics to snow cover change: A meta-analysis of experimental manipulation

Journal

SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 100, Issue -, Pages 51-58

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.05.018

Keywords

Climate change; Greenhouse gas; Mineralization; Nitrification; Plant N; Soil N

Categories

Funding

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB15010301]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41375119, 31470522, 31522010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Snowpack in winter is very sensitive to climate change, and may in turn induce complex effects on nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems. This study synthesized data from 41 publications based on snow depth manipulation experiments and conducted a meta-analysis to assess the general responses of 12 variables related to terrestrial nitrogen (N) pools and dynamics to altered snowpack depth. Our results indicated that increasing snow depth significantly increased foliar N (+4.5%) and microbial N (MBN, +35.9%), but significantly decreased soil N2O efflux (-34.1%). However, altered snow depth did not significantly affect soil dissolved organic N (DON), total inorganic N, nitrate and N leaching. The decreased net nitrification (-24.8%) by deeper snowpack suggested that less soil N transformed to nitrate, which might contribute to reduce soil N losses. Since increasing snowpack depth promoted MBN, the unchanged, net N mineralization and soil ammonium content were probably due to limitation of the soil N availability and other soil abiotic factors rather than soil microbes. In addition, long-term and snowfence or shelter methods generated the most significant effects on N dynamics for snow addition or removal experiments, respectively. Our results provide a comprehensive understanding of how N cycling responses to altered snow cover under climate change scenarios. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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