Effects of Forest Fire on Organic Carbon in Deep Soil of Boreal Forests

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2017.05.010

Abstract

Abstract:

Forest fire is one of the most important ecological process that drives the regeneration,succession and material circulation of boreal forests.The aboveground and surface soil biomass and carbon density of boreal forests were significantly changed by forest fire.Subsoil carbon pool,which may store almost half of soil carbon of boreal forest,is also strongly influenced by forest fire,however,was paid little attention to.In this study,we measured effect of fire on subsoil carbon density,and analyzed relationship between subsoil carbon density and its driving factors in a 2010 burned site at Huzhong Natural Reserve in Great Xing’an Mountains.Results showed that the distribution of soil organic carbon(SOC)content along depth in burned sites were significantly different from that of unburned control sites,deep SOC content and carbon density in burned sites were significantly lower than that in the control sites(n=56,P<0.001);microbial biomass carbon content and easily oxidized organic carbon content in burned sites were significantly higher than that in control sites(n=56,P<0.01),but soil C/N and dissolved organic carbon content were significantly lower than that in control sites(n=56,P<0.01).Soil moisture in burned sites was significantly lower than the control(n=56,P<0.001),but soil temperature and pH were significantly higher than those in control sites(n=56,P<0.001).Our results suggested that forest fire significantly reduced chemical stability of subsoil SOC of boreal forests,promoted the growth of soil microorganism by increasing soil temperature,and eventually led to the accelerated decomposition of SOC and the decrease of subsoil SOC storage.

Key words: boreal forests, forest fire, subsoil carbon, carbon density, Great Xing’an Mountains;

CLC Number:

S762.1
S714

NAN Penghui, CAO Ningyang, QI Lin, SU Baoling. Effects of Forest Fire on Organic Carbon in Deep Soil of Boreal Forests[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2017, (5): 52-60.

Figures/Tables 8

Tab.1

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Tab.2

Fig 6.

References 28

[1]	刘留辉, 邢世和, 高承芳. 土壤碳储量研究方法及其影响因素[J]. 武夷科学, 2008,23(1):219-226.
[2]	苏永中, 赵哈林. 土壤有机碳储量、影响因素及其环境效应的研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2002,22(3):220-228.
[3]	刘京, 常庆瑞, 陈涛, 等. 陕西省土壤有机碳密度空间分布及储量估算[J]. 土壤通报, 2012,43(3):656-661.
[4]	周国模, 刘恩斌, 佘光辉. 森林土壤碳库研究方法进展[J]. 浙江林学院学报, 2006,23(2):207-216.
[5]	刘国华, 傅伯杰, 方精云. 中国森林碳动态及其对全球碳平衡的贡献[J]. 生态学报, 2000,20(5):733-740.
[6]	Dixon R K, Brown S, Houghton R. Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems[J]. Science, 1994,263(5144):185-189. doi: 10.1126/science.263.5144.185 pmid: 17839174
[7]	Trumbore S. Radiocarbon and soil carbon dynamics[J]. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 2009,37:47-66. doi: 10.1146/annurev.earth.36.031207.124300
[8]	刘满强, 胡锋, 陈小云. 土壤有机碳稳定机制研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2007,27(6):2642-2650.
[9]	Schmidt M W, Torn M S, Abiven S. Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property[J]. Nature, 2011,478(7367):49-56. doi: 10.1038/nature10386 pmid: 21979045
[10]	Schmidt M W, Torn M S, Abiven S. Stabilization and destabilization of soil organic matter—a new focus[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2007,85(1):1-7. doi: 10.1007/s10533-007-9099-x
[11]	Kleber M, Nico P S. Old and stable soil organic matter is not necessarily chemically recalcitrant:implications for modeling concepts and temperature sensitivity[J]. Global Change Biology, 2010,17(2):1097-1107. doi: 10.1111/gcb.2010.17.issue-2
[12]	姚树人, 文定元. 森林消防管理学[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2002.
[13]	Running S W. Ecosystem disturbance,carbon,and climate[J]. Science, 2008,321(5889):652-653. doi: 10.1126/science.1159607 pmid: 18669853
[14]	陈庆强, 沈承德, 易惟熙, 等. 土壤碳循环研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 1998,13(6):555-563.
[15]	Harden J, Trumbore S, Stocks B. The role of fire in the boreal carbon budget[J]. Global Change Biology, 2002,6(S1):174-184. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.06019.x
[16]	吴庆标, 王效科, 郭然. 土壤有机碳稳定性及其影响因素[J]. 土壤通报, 2006,36(5):743-747.
[17]	Fontaine S, Barot S, Barré P. Stability of organic carbon in deep soil layers controlled by fresh carbon supply[J]. Nature, 2007,450(7167):277-280. doi: 10.1038/nature06275 pmid: 17994095
[18]	Rumpel C I Kögel-Knabner. Deep soil organic matter—a key but poorly understood component of terrestrial C cycle[J]. Plant and Soil, 2011,338(1):143-158. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0391-5
[19]	Fierer N, Allen A S, Schimel J P. Controls on microbial CO₂ production:a comparison of surface and subsurface soil horizons[J]. Global Change Biology, 2003,9(9):1322-1332. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00663.x
[20]	Davidson E A.Janssens I A. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feed backs to climate change[J]. Nature, 2006,440(7081):165-173. doi: 10.1038/nature04514 pmid: 16525463
[21]	王丽, 嶋一徹. 山地林火烧迹地土壤养分的动态变化[J]. 水土保持通报, 2008,28(1):173-177.
[22]	姜勇, 诸葛玉平. 火烧对土壤性质的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2003,34(1):65-69.
[23]	唐季林, 欧国菁. 林火对云南松林土壤性质的影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 1995,17(2):44-49.
[24]	杜嘉林, 胡海清. 低强度林火对兴安落叶松林土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2014,42(14):4305-4308.
[25]	孔健健, 杨健. 林火对大兴安岭落叶松林土壤性质的短期与长期影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2014,33(6):1445-1450.
[26]	谷会岩, 金屿淞, 张芸慧, 等. 林火对大兴安岭偃松-兴安落叶松林土壤养分的影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2016,38(7):48-54.
[27]	许鹏波, 屈明, 薛立. 火对森林土壤的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013,32(6):1596-1606.
[28]	王海淇, 郭爱雪, 邸雪颖. 大兴安岭林火点烧对土壤有机碳和微生物量碳的即时影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2011,39(5):72-76.

土壤深度 /cm	土壤含水量/%		土壤温度/℃		pH
土壤深度 /cm	对照样地	火烧迹地	对照样地	火烧迹地	对照样地	火烧迹地
0-20	61.07±14.95	37.51±9.71^***	8.94±2.38	19.74±3.01^***	4.00±0.43	5.15±0.82^***
20-40	54.16±13.80	27.34±6.72^***	5.09±1.19	9.33±2.64^***	4.36±0.23	4.88±0.40^***
40-60	49.16±10.27	24.71±4.54^***	2.77±0.76	6.49±2.89^***	4.49±0.33	4.78±0.48^*
60-120	40.73± 6.26	20.89±4.47^***	1.11±0.45	4.88±1.30^***	4.59±0.30	4.87±0.38^***
土壤深度 /cm	容重/(g/cm³)		全碳/%		可溶性有机碳/(mg/kg)
土壤深度 /cm	对照样地	火烧迹地	对照样地	火烧迹地	对照样地	火烧迹地
0-20	0.94±0.06	1.11±0.13^***	4.93±2.87	3.54±1.87^*	506.75±238.49	409.49±275.28
20-40	1.19±0.10	1.31±0.09^***	1.82±1.08	1.50±0.85	113.25±62.08	107.12±67.68
40-60	1.20±0.08	1.26±0.11	1.48±0.56	0.85±0.37^***	117.99±47.64	70.15±35.51^***
60-120	1.21±0.14	1.21±0.10	1.20±0.37	0.78±0.32^***	115.41±38.68	84.11±36.51^***

土壤深度	驱动因子		高温(24℃)						中温(14℃)						低温(4℃)
土壤深度	驱动因子		斜率		R²		P		斜率		R²		P		斜率		R²		P
0—20cm
	土壤含水量		0.42		0.18		**		0.39		0.16		**		0.13		0.2		0.31
	可溶性有机碳含量		0.87		0.75		***		0.88		0.7		***		0.87		0.75		***
	易氧化有机碳含量		0.86		0.73		***		0.85		0.71		***		0.63		0.4		***
	微生物碳含量		0.68		0.45		***		0.65		0.41		***		0.36		0.11		*
20—40cm
	土壤含水量		0.21		0.04		0.11		0.12		0.01		0.38		-0.22		0.05		0.1
	可溶性有机碳含量		0.89		0.8		***		0.92		0.86		***		0.75		0.57		***
	易氧化有机碳含量		0.83		0.68		***		0.85		0.72		***		0.73		0.54		***
	微生物碳含量		0.54		0.29		***		0.43		0.2		***		0.32		0		0.981
40—60cm
	土壤含水量		0.42		0.18		**		0.21		0.05		0.126		-0.15		0.02		0.26
	可溶性有机碳含量		0.88		0.78		***		0.82		0.68		***		0.43		0.19		***
	易氧化有机碳含量		0.85		0.72		***		0.89		0.8		***		0.67		0.45		***
	微生物碳含量		0.66		0.43		***		0.77		0.6		***		0.71		0.5		***
土壤深度		驱动因子		高温(24℃)						中温(14℃)						低温(4℃)
土壤深度		驱动因子		斜率		R²		P		斜率		R²		P		斜率		R²		P
60—120cm
		土壤含水量		0.49		0.24		***		0.24		0.06		0.07		-0.24		0.06		0.07
		可溶性有机碳含量		0.84		0.7		***		0.83		0.69		***		0.49		0.24		***
		易氧化有机碳含量		0.47		0.22		***		0.7		0.49		***		0.81		0.67		***
		微生物碳含量		0.24		0.06		0.06		0.46		0.21		***		0.64		0.42		***