TY - JOUR
T1 - Microbial-explicit processes and refined perennial plant traits improve modeled ecosystem carbon dynamics
AU - Berardi, Danielle M.
AU - Hartman, Melannie D.
AU - Brzostek, Edward R.
AU - Bernacchi, Carl J.
AU - DeLucia, Evan H.
AU - von Haden, Adam C.
AU - Kantola, Ilsa
AU - Moore, Caitlin E.
AU - Yang, Wendy
AU - Hudiburg, Tara W.
AU - Parton, William J.
N1 - We thank everyone who collected and shared data and insight on management practices at the University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana Energy Farm. This research was supported in part by a NIFA-AFRI Predoctoral Fellowship under Award Number 2021-67034-35046 and by the DOE Center for Advanced Bioenergy and Bioproducts Innovation (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under Award Number DE-SC0018420). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Energy. TH was supported by USDA NIFA award number 2021-67020-33419.
PY - 2024/3
Y1 - 2024/3
N2 - Globally, soils hold approximately half of ecosystem carbon and can serve as a source or sink depending on climate, vegetation, management, and disturbance regimes. Understanding how soil carbon dynamics are influenced by these factors is essential to evaluate proposed natural climate solutions and policy regarding net ecosystem carbon balance. Soil microbes play a key role in both carbon fluxes and stabilization. However, biogeochemical models often do not specifically address microbial-explicit processes. Here, we incorporated microbial-explicit processes into the DayCent biogeochemical model to better represent large perennial grasses and mechanisms of soil carbon formation and stabilization. We also take advantage of recent model improvements to better represent perennial grass structural complexity and life-history traits. Specifically, this study focuses on: 1) a plant sub-model that represents perennial phenology and more refined plant chemistry with downstream implications for soil organic matter (SOM) cycling though litter inputs, 2) live and dead soil microbe pools that influence routing of carbon to physically protected and unprotected pools, 3) Michaelis-Menten kinetics rather than first-order kinetics in the soil decomposition calculations, and 4) feedbacks between decomposition and live microbial pools. We evaluated the performance of the plant sub-model and two SOM cycling sub-models, Michaelis-Menten (MM) and first-order (FO), using observations of net ecosystem production, ecosystem respiration, soil respiration, microbial biomass, and soil carbon from long-term bioenergy research plots in the mid-western United States. The MM sub-model represented seasonal dynamics of soil carbon fluxes better than the FO sub-model which consistently overestimated winter soil respiration. While both SOM sub-models were similarly calibrated to total, physically protected, and physically unprotected soil carbon measurements, the models differed in future soil carbon response to disturbance and climate, most notably in the protected pools. Adding microbial-explicit mechanisms of soil processes to ecosystem models will improve model predictions of ecosystem carbon balances but more data and research are necessary to validate disturbance and climate change responses and soil pool allocation.
AB - Globally, soils hold approximately half of ecosystem carbon and can serve as a source or sink depending on climate, vegetation, management, and disturbance regimes. Understanding how soil carbon dynamics are influenced by these factors is essential to evaluate proposed natural climate solutions and policy regarding net ecosystem carbon balance. Soil microbes play a key role in both carbon fluxes and stabilization. However, biogeochemical models often do not specifically address microbial-explicit processes. Here, we incorporated microbial-explicit processes into the DayCent biogeochemical model to better represent large perennial grasses and mechanisms of soil carbon formation and stabilization. We also take advantage of recent model improvements to better represent perennial grass structural complexity and life-history traits. Specifically, this study focuses on: 1) a plant sub-model that represents perennial phenology and more refined plant chemistry with downstream implications for soil organic matter (SOM) cycling though litter inputs, 2) live and dead soil microbe pools that influence routing of carbon to physically protected and unprotected pools, 3) Michaelis-Menten kinetics rather than first-order kinetics in the soil decomposition calculations, and 4) feedbacks between decomposition and live microbial pools. We evaluated the performance of the plant sub-model and two SOM cycling sub-models, Michaelis-Menten (MM) and first-order (FO), using observations of net ecosystem production, ecosystem respiration, soil respiration, microbial biomass, and soil carbon from long-term bioenergy research plots in the mid-western United States. The MM sub-model represented seasonal dynamics of soil carbon fluxes better than the FO sub-model which consistently overestimated winter soil respiration. While both SOM sub-models were similarly calibrated to total, physically protected, and physically unprotected soil carbon measurements, the models differed in future soil carbon response to disturbance and climate, most notably in the protected pools. Adding microbial-explicit mechanisms of soil processes to ecosystem models will improve model predictions of ecosystem carbon balances but more data and research are necessary to validate disturbance and climate change responses and soil pool allocation.
KW - Carbon
KW - DayCent
KW - Measurable soil pools
KW - Microbial-explicit soil organic matter model
KW - Miscanthus
KW - Soil respiration
KW - Switchgrass
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85187200114&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85187200114&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116851
DO - 10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116851
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85187200114
SN - 0016-7061
VL - 443
JO - Geoderma
JF - Geoderma
M1 - 116851
ER -