More Like this

1. Deepening roots can enhance carbonate weathering by amplifying CO₂-rich recharge

   https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-55-2021  

   Wen, Hang ; Sullivan, Pamela L. ; Macpherson, Gwendolyn L. ; Billings, Sharon A. ; Li, Li ( January 2021 , Biogeosciences)

   null (Ed.)

   Abstract. Carbonate weathering is essential in regulating atmosphericCO2 and carbon cycle at the century timescale. Plant roots accelerateweathering by elevating soil CO2 via respiration. It however remainspoorly understood how and how much rooting characteristics (e.g., depth anddensity distribution) modify flow paths and weathering. We address thisknowledge gap using field data from and reactive transport numericalexperiments at the Konza Prairie Biological Station (Konza), Kansas (USA), asite where woody encroachment into grasslands is surmised to deepen roots. Results indicate that deepening roots can enhance weathering in two ways.First, deepening roots can control thermodynamic limits of carbonatedissolution by regulating how much CO2 transports vertical downward tothe deeper carbonate-rich zone. The base-case data and model from Konzareveal that concentrations of Ca and dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) areregulated by soil pCO2 driven by the seasonal soil respiration. Thisrelationship can be encapsulated in equations derived in this workdescribing the dependence of Ca and DIC on temperature and soil CO2. The relationship can explain spring water Ca and DIC concentrations from multiple carbonate-dominated catchments. Second, numericalexperiments show that roots control weathering rates by regulating recharge(or vertical water fluxes) into the deeper carbonate zone and exportreaction products at dissolution equilibrium. The numerical experimentsexplored the potential effects of partitioningmore »40 % of infiltrated waterto depth in woodlands compared to 5 % in grasslands. Soil CO2 datasuggest relatively similar soil CO2distribution over depth, which in woodlands and grasslands leads only to 1 % to∼ 12 % difference inweathering rates if flow partitioning was kept the same between the two landcovers. In contrast, deepening roots can enhance weathering by ∼ 17 % to200 % as infiltration rates increased from 3.7 × 10−2 to 3.7 m/a. Weathering rates in these cases however are more than an order of magnitude higher than a case without roots atall, underscoring the essential role of roots in general. Numericalexperiments also indicate that weathering fronts in woodlands propagated> 2 times deeper compared to grasslands after 300 years at aninfiltration rate of 0.37 m/a. These differences in weathering fronts areultimately caused by the differences in the contact times of CO2-charged water with carbonate in the deep subsurface. Within the limitation of modeling exercises, these data and numerical experiments prompt the hypothesis that (1) deepening roots in woodlands can enhance carbonate weathering by promotingrecharge and CO2–carbonate contact in the deepsubsurface and (2) the hydrological impacts of rooting characteristics canbe more influential than those of soil CO2 distribution in modulatingweathering rates. We call for colocated characterizations of roots,subsurface structure, and soil CO2 levels, as well as their linkage to waterand water chemistry. These measurements will be essential to illuminatefeedback mechanisms of land cover changes, chemical weathering, globalcarbon cycle, and climate.« less
2. The predominant control of hydroclimatic conditions on carbon and weathering fluxes at the hillslope scale

   Wen, Hang ; Sullivan, Pamela ; Billings, Sharon ; Ajami, Hoori ; Cueva, Alejandro ; Flores, Alejandro ; Hirmas, Daniel ; Koop, Aaron ; Murenbeeld, Kathryn ; Zhang, Xi ; et al ( December 2021 , American Geophysical Union annual conference)

   Soil biota generate CO2 that can vertically export to the atmosphere, and dissolved organic and inorganic carbon (DOC and DIC) that can laterally export to streams and accelerate weathering. These processes are regulated by external hydroclimate forcing and internal structures (permeability distribution), the relative influences of which are rarely studied. Understanding these interactions is essential a hydrological extremes intensify in the future. Here we explore the question: How and to what extent do hydrological and permeability distribution conditions regulate soil carbon transformations and chemical weathering? We address the questions using a hillslope reactive transport model constrained by data from the Fitch Forest (Kansas, United States). Numerical experiments were used to mimic hydrological extremes and variable shallow-versus-deep permeability contrasts. Results demonstrate that under dry conditions (0.08 mm/day), long water transit times led to more mineralization of organic carbon (OC) into inorganic carbon (IC) form (>98\%). Of the IC produced, ~ 75\% was emitted upward as CO2 gas and ~ 25\% was exported laterally as DIC into the stream. Wet conditions (8.0 mm/day) resulted in less mineralization (~88\%), more DOC production (~12\%), and more lateral fluxes of IC (~50\% of produced IC). Carbonate precipitated under dry conditions and dissolved under wet conditionsmore »as the fast flow rapidly droves the reaction to disequilibrium. The results depict a conceptual hillslope model that prompts four hypotheses for our community to test. H1: Droughts enhance carbon mineralization and vertical upward carbon fluxes, whereas large hydrological events such as storms and flooding enhance subsurface vertical connectivity, reduce transit times, and promote lateral export. H2: The role of weathering as a net carbon sink or source to the atmosphere depends on the interaction between hydrologic flows and lithology: transition from droughts to storms can shift carbonate from a carbon sink (mineral precipitation) to carbon source (dissolution). H3: Permeability contrasts regulate the lateral flow partitioning via shallow flow paths versus deeper groundwater though this alter reaction rates negligibly. H4: Stream chemistry reflect flow paths and can potentially quantify water transit times: solutes enriched in shallow soils have a younger water signature; solutes abundant at depth carry older water signature.« less
3. Phosphorus availability and leaching losses in annual and perennial cropping systems in an upper US Midwest landscape

   https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.8sf7m0cpx  

   Hussain, Mir Zaman ; Hamilton, Stephen ; Robertson, G. Philip ; Basso, Bruno ( January 2021 )

   Abstract

   Excessive phosphorus (P) applications to croplands can contribute to eutrophication of surface waters through surface runoff and subsurface (leaching) losses. We analyzed leaching losses of total dissolved P (TDP) from no-till corn, hybrid poplar (Populus nigra X P. maximowiczii), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), miscanthus (Miscanthus giganteus), native grasses, and restored prairie, all planted in 2008 on former cropland in Michigan, USA. All crops except corn (13 kg P ha−1 year−1) were grown without P fertilization. Biomass was harvested at the end of each growing season except for poplar. Soil water at 1.2 m depth was sampled weekly to biweekly for TDP determination during March–November 2009–2016 using tension lysimeters. Soil test P (0–25 cm depth) was measured every autumn. Soil water TDP concentrations were usually below levels where eutrophication of surface waters is frequently observed (> 0.02 mg L−1) but often higher than in deep groundwater or nearby streams and lakes. Rates of P leaching, estimated from measured concentrations and modeled drainage, did not differ statistically among cropping systems across years; 7-year cropping system means ranged from 0.035 to 0.072 kg P ha−1 year−1 with large interannual variation. Leached P was positively related to STP, which decreased over the 7 years in all systems. These results indicate that both P-fertilized and unfertilized cropping systems may leach legacy P from past cropland management.
   

   Methods

   Experimental details The Biofuel Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) is located at the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) (42.3956° N, 85.3749° W; elevation 288 m asl) in southwestern Michigan, USA. This site is a part of the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (www.glbrc.org) and is a Long-term Ecological Research site (www.lter.kbs.msu.edu). Soils are mesic Typic Hapludalfs developed on glacial outwash54 with high sand content (76% in the upper 150 cm) intermixed with silt-rich loess in the upper 50 cm55. The water table lies approximately 12–14 m below the surface. The climate is humid temperate with a mean annual air temperature of 9.1 °C and annual precipitation of 1005 mm, 511 mm of which falls between May and September (1981–2010)56,57. The BCSE was established as a randomized complete block design in 2008 on preexisting farmland. Prior to BCSE establishment, the field was used for grain crop and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) production for several decades. Between 2003 and 2007, the field received a total of ~ 300 kg P ha−1 as manure, and the southern half, which contains one of four replicate plots, received an additional 206 kg P ha−1 as inorganic fertilizer. The experimental design consists of five randomized blocks each containing one replicate plot (28 by 40 m) of 10 cropping systems (treatments) (Supplementary Fig. S1; also see Sanford et al.58). Block 5 is not included in the present study. Details on experimental design and site history are provided in Robertson and Hamilton57 and Gelfand et al.59. Leaching of P is analyzed in six of the cropping systems: (i) continuous no-till corn, (ii) switchgrass, (iii) miscanthus, (iv) a mixture of five species of native grasses, (v) a restored native prairie containing 18 plant species (Supplementary Table S1), and (vi) hybrid poplar. Agronomic management Phenological cameras and field observations indicated that the perennial herbaceous crops emerged each year between mid-April and mid-May. Corn was planted each year in early May. Herbaceous crops were harvested at the end of each growing season with the timing depending on weather: between October and November for corn and between November and December for herbaceous perennial crops. Corn stover was harvested shortly after corn grain, leaving approximately 10 cm height of stubble above the ground. The poplar was harvested only once, as the culmination of a 6-year rotation, in the winter of 2013–2014. Leaf emergence and senescence based on daily phenological images indicated the beginning and end of the poplar growing season, respectively, in each year. Application of inorganic fertilizers to the different crops followed a management approach typical for the region (Table 1). Corn was fertilized with 13 kg P ha−1 year−1 as starter fertilizer (N-P-K of 19-17-0) at the time of planting and an additional 33 kg P ha−1 year−1 was added as superphosphate in spring 2015. Corn also received N fertilizer around the time of planting and in mid-June at typical rates for the region (Table 1). No P fertilizer was applied to the perennial grassland or poplar systems (Table 1). All perennial grasses (except restored prairie) were provided 56 kg N ha−1 year−1 of N fertilizer in early summer between 2010 and 2016; an additional 77 kg N ha−1 was applied to miscanthus in 2009. Poplar was fertilized once with 157 kg N ha−1 in 2010 after the canopy had closed. Sampling of subsurface soil water and soil for P determination Subsurface soil water samples were collected beneath the root zone (1.2 m depth) using samplers installed at approximately 20 cm into the unconsolidated sand of 2Bt2 and 2E/Bt horizons (soils at the site are described in Crum and Collins54). Soil water was collected from two kinds of samplers: Prenart samplers constructed of Teflon and silica (http://www.prenart.dk/soil-water-samplers/) in replicate blocks 1 and 2 and Eijkelkamp ceramic samplers (http://www.eijkelkamp.com) in blocks 3 and 4 (Supplementary Fig. S1). The samplers were installed in 2008 at an angle using a hydraulic corer, with the sampling tubes buried underground within the plots and the sampler located about 9 m from the plot edge. There were no consistent differences in TDP concentrations between the two sampler types. Beginning in the 2009 growing season, subsurface soil water was sampled at weekly to biweekly intervals during non-frozen periods (April–November) by applying 50 kPa of vacuum to each sampler for 24 h, during which the extracted water was collected in glass bottles. Samples were filtered using different filter types (all 0.45 µm pore size) depending on the volume of leachate collected: 33-mm dia. cellulose acetate membrane filters when volumes were less than 50 mL; and 47-mm dia. Supor 450 polyethersulfone membrane filters for larger volumes. Total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) in water samples was analyzed by persulfate digestion of filtered samples to convert all phosphorus forms to soluble reactive phosphorus, followed by colorimetric analysis by long-pathlength spectrophotometry (UV-1800 Shimadzu, Japan) using the molybdate blue method60, for which the method detection limit was ~ 0.005 mg P L−1. Between 2009 and 2016, soil samples (0–25 cm depth) were collected each autumn from all plots for determination of soil test P (STP) by the Bray-1 method61, using as an extractant a dilute hydrochloric acid and ammonium fluoride solution, as is recommended for neutral to slightly acidic soils. The measured STP concentration in mg P kg−1 was converted to kg P ha−1 based on soil sampling depth and soil bulk density (mean, 1.5 g cm−3). Sampling of water samples from lakes, streams and wells for P determination In addition to chemistry of soil and subsurface soil water in the BCSE, waters from lakes, streams, and residential water supply wells were also sampled during 2009–2016 for TDP analysis using Supor 450 membrane filters and the same analytical method as for soil water. These water bodies are within 15 km of the study site, within a landscape mosaic of row crops, grasslands, deciduous forest, and wetlands, with some residential development (Supplementary Fig. S2, Supplementary Table S2). Details of land use and cover change in the vicinity of KBS are given in Hamilton et al.48, and patterns in nutrient concentrations in local surface waters are further discussed in Hamilton62. Leaching estimates, modeled drainage, and data analysis Leaching was estimated at daily time steps and summarized as total leaching on a crop-year basis, defined from the date of planting or leaf emergence in a given year to the day prior to planting or emergence in the following year. TDP concentrations (mg L−1) of subsurface soil water were linearly interpolated between sampling dates during non-freezing periods (April–November) and over non-sampling periods (December–March) based on the preceding November and subsequent April samples. Daily rates of TDP leaching (kg ha−1) were calculated by multiplying concentration (mg L−1) by drainage rates (m3 ha−1 day−1) modeled by the Systems Approach for Land Use Sustainability (SALUS) model, a crop growth model that is well calibrated for KBS soil and environmental conditions. SALUS simulates yield and environmental outcomes in response to weather, soil, management (planting dates, plant population, irrigation, N fertilizer application, and tillage), and genetics63. The SALUS water balance sub-model simulates surface runoff, saturated and unsaturated water flow, drainage, root water uptake, and evapotranspiration during growing and non-growing seasons63. The SALUS model has been used in studies of evapotranspiration48,51,64 and nutrient leaching20,65,66,67 from KBS soils, and its predictions of growing-season evapotranspiration are consistent with independent measurements based on growing-season soil water drawdown53 and evapotranspiration measured by eddy covariance68. Phosphorus leaching was assumed insignificant on days when SALUS predicted no drainage. Volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations in leachate for each crop-year and for the entire 7-year study period were calculated as the total dissolved P leaching flux (kg ha−1) divided by the total drainage (m3 ha−1). One-way ANOVA with time (crop-year) as the fixed factor was conducted to compare total annual drainage rates, P leaching rates, volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations, and maximum aboveground biomass among the cropping systems over all seven crop-years as well as with TDP concentrations from local lakes, streams, and groundwater wells. When a significant (α = 0.05) difference was detected among the groups, we used the Tukey honest significant difference (HSD) post-hoc test to make pairwise comparisons among the groups. In the case of maximum aboveground biomass, we used the Tukey–Kramer method to make pairwise comparisons among the groups because the absence of poplar data after the 2013 harvest resulted in unequal sample sizes. We also used the Tukey–Kramer method to compare the frequency distributions of TDP concentrations in all of the soil leachate samples with concentrations in lakes, streams, and groundwater wells, since each sample category had very different numbers of measurements.
   

   Other

   Individual spreadsheets in “data table_leaching_dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen.xls” 1.    annual precip_drainage 2.    biomass_corn, perennial grasses 3.    biomass_poplar 4.    annual N leaching _vol-wtd conc 5.    Summary_N leached 6.    annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc 7.    growing season length 8.    correlation_nh4 VS no3 9.    correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Each spreadsheet is described below along with an explanation of variates. Note that ‘nan’ indicate data are missing or not available. First row indicates header; second row indicates units 1. Spreadsheet: annual precip_drainage Description: Precipitation measured from nearby Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Weather station, over 2009-2016 study period. Data shown in Figure 1; original data source for precipitation (https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/7). Drainage estimated from SALUS crop model. Note that drainage is percolation out of the root zone (0-125 cm). Annual precipitation and drainage values shown here are calculated for growing and non-growing crop periods. Variate    Description year    year of the observation crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” precip_G    precipitation during growing period (milliMeter) precip_NG    precipitation during non-growing period (milliMeter) drainage_G    drainage during growing period (milliMeter) drainage_NG    drainage during non-growing period (milliMeter)      2. Spreadsheet: biomass_corn, perennial grasses Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass and restored prairie plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2.   Variate    Description year    year of the observation date    day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” replicate    each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 station    stations (S1, S2 and S3) of samplings within the plot. For more details, refer to link (https://data.sustainability.glbrc.org/protocols/156) species    plant species that are rooted within the quadrat during the time of maximum biomass harvest. See protocol for more information, refer to link (http://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/36) For maize biomass, grain and whole biomass reported in the paper (weed biomass or surface litter are excluded). Surface litter biomass not included in any crops; weed biomass not included in switchgrass and miscanthus, but included in grass mixture and prairie. fraction    Fraction of biomass biomass_plot    biomass per plot on dry-weight basis (Grams_Per_SquareMeter) biomass_ha    biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying column biomass per plot with 0.01 3. Spreadsheet: biomass_poplar Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2. Note that poplar biomass was estimated from crop growth curves until the poplar was harvested in the winter of 2013-14. Variate    Description year    year of the observation method    methods of poplar biomass sampling date    day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate    each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 diameter_at_ground    poplar diameter (milliMeter) at the ground diameter_at_15cm    poplar diameter (milliMeter) at 15 cm height biomass_tree    biomass per plot (Grams_Per_Tree) biomass_ha    biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying biomass per tree with 0.01 4. Spreadsheet: annual N leaching_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) of nitrate (no3) and dissolved organic nitrogen (don) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen leached and volume-wtd mean N concentration shown in Figure 3a and Figure 3b, respectively. Note that ammonium (nh4) concentration were much lower and often undetectable (<0.07 milliGrams_N_Per_Liter). Also note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, data from some replicates are missing.    Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year    year of the observation replicate    each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 no3 leached    annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached    annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd no3 conc.    Volume-weighted mean no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) vol-wtd don conc.    Volume-weighted mean don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) 5. Spreadsheet: summary_N leached Description: Summary of total amount and forms of N leached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and the percent of applied N lost to leaching over the seven years for corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen amount leached shown in Figure 4a and percent of applied N lost shown in Figure 4b. Note the fraction of unleached N includes in harvest, accumulation in root biomass, soil organic matter or gaseous N emissions were not measured in the study. Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” no3 leached    annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached    annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) N unleached    N unleached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) in other sources are not studied % of N applied N lost to leaching    % of N applied N lost to leaching 6. Spreadsheet: annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_Per_Liter) of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for DOC leached and volume-wtd mean DOC concentration shown in Figure 5a and Figure 5b, respectively. Note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, water samples were not available for DOC measurements.     Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year    year of the observation replicate    each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 doc leached    annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd doc conc.    volume-weighted mean doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter) 7. Spreadsheet: growing season length Description: Growing season length (days) of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Date shown in Figure S2. Note that growing season is from the date of planting or emergence to the date of harvest (or leaf senescence in case of poplar).   Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year    year of the observation growing season length    growing season length (days) 8. Spreadsheet: correlation_nh4 VS no3 Description: Correlation of ammonium (nh4+) and nitrate (no3-) concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data shown in Figure S3. Note that nh4+ concentration in the leachates was very low compared to no3- and don concentration and often undetectable in three crop-years (2013-2015) when measurements are available. Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” date    date of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate    each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 nh4 conc    nh4 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3 conc    no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter)   9. Spreadsheet: correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Description: Correlations of don and nitrate concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter); and doc (milliGrams_Per_Liter) and don concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data of correlation of don and nitrate concentrations shown in Figure S4 a and doc and don concentrations shown in Figure S4 b. Variate    Description crop    “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year    year of the observation don    don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3     no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) doc    doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter)
   More>>
4. Increased {DOC} concentrations and earlier stream flow generation in response to warming in a high elevation mountain watershed in Colorado

   Kerins, Devon ; Zhi, Wei ; Sullivan, Pamela ; Williams, Kenneth ; Brown, Wendy ; Dong, Wenming ; Carroll, Rosemary ; Kirchner, James ; Li, Li ( December 2021 , American Geophysical Union annual meeting)

   High elevation mountain watersheds are undergoing rapid warming and declining snow fractions worldwide, causing earlier and quicker snowmelt. Understanding how this hydrologic shift affects subsurface flow paths, biogeochemical reactions, and solute export has been challenging due to the entanglement of hydrological and biogeochemical processes. Coal Creek, a high-elevation catchment (2,700 3,700 m, 53 km2) in Colorado, is experiencing a higher rate of warming than surrounding low-lying areas. This warming corresponds with dynamic and increased responses from biogenic solutes and dissolved organic carbon (DOC), whereas the behavior of geogenic solutes and dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) has remained relatively unchanged. DOC has experienced the largest concentration increase (>3x), with annual average flow weighted concentrations positively correlated to average annual temperature. This suggests temperature is the main driver of increasing DOC levels. Although DOC and DIC response to warming is influenced by many drivers, the relative contribution of each remains unknown. DOC and DIC were analyzed to incorporate both carbon component products of soil respiration (DOC and CO2) and to represent high solute concentrations transported by shallow (DOC) versus deep (DIC) subsurface flow. The contrasting behavior of these carbon solutes indicates climate change and warming are driving changes in organic matter decomposition andmore »soil respiration. Modeling results from the process-based model HBV-BioRT show increased temperatures cause earlier snowmelt and streamflow generation and lower peak discharge. As stream flow generation occurs earlier, so do DOC flushing and DIC dilution events. Additionally, post-snowmelt periods show greater DOC production and concentrations under warming scenarios. Results indicated increased production of DOC in post-snowmelt periods. DOC is then flushed out by earlier snowmelt partitioned through the shallow soil zone. Most process-based studies lack a watershed-scale understanding of carbon transformation and flow path alterations. This work demonstrates complex hydrologic and biogeochemical coupling at the watershed scale to illustrate how water flow paths and chemistry are responding to a changing climate in highelevation mountain watersheds.« less
5. Carbon Dioxide Concentrations and Efflux from Permanent, Semi-Permanent, and Temporary Subalpine Ponds

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-019-01140-3  

   DelVecchia, Amanda Gay ; Balik, Jared A. ; Campbell, Susan K. ; Taylor, Brad W. ; West, Derek C. ; Wissinger, Scott A. ( April 2019 , Wetlands)

   Small ponds account for a disproportionately high percentage of carbon dioxide emissions relative to their small surface area. It is therefore crucial to understand carbon flow in these ponds to refine the current global carbon budget, especially because climate change is affecting pond hydrology. High elevation ponds in the Elk Mountains of western Colorado are drying more frequently as the timing of snowmelt advances. We compared CO2 concentrations and fluxes among ponds of different hydroperiods over diel sampling periods during the course of the 2017 open-water period. CO2 concentrations were significantly negatively correlated with pond depth and averaged 77.6 ± 24.5 μmol L−1 (mean ± S.E.) across all ponds and sampling events. Ponds were up to twenty times supersaturated in CO2 with respect to the atmosphere. Flux was highly variable within individual ponds but correlated with time of sampling and was highest at night. Flux averaged 19.7 ± 18.8 mg CO2 m−2 h−1 across all ponds and sampling events. We also compared flux values obtained using modeled and empirical methods and found that widely-applied models of gas exchange rates using wind-based gas exchange (K) values yielded estimates of CO2 flux that were significantly higher than those obtained using the floating chamber approach, but estimates of CO2more »flux using globally averaged convection-based K values were lower than those obtained using the floating chambers. Lastly, we integrated soil vs. water efflux measurements with long-term patterns in hydrology to predict how total season-long efflux might change under the more rapid drying regimes and longer seasons that are already occurring in these systems. Because soil CO2 efflux averaged 277.0 ± 49.0 mg CO2 m−2 h−1, temporary ponds emitted 674.1 ± 99.4 kg CO2 m−2 over the course of the 2017 season from ice-out to refreezing, which was over twice as much as permanent and semi-permanent ponds. Our results emphasize that contributions of CO2 from small ponds to the global carbon budget estimates will vary with pond hydroperiod and sampling methodology, which have been overlooked given that most previous estimates were collected from limited sampling periods and from pond waters alone. Furthermore, pond CO2 contributions are predicted to increase over time as pond areas transition from efflux from water to efflux from soil.« less