The response of soil organic matter (OM) decomposition to increasing temperature is a critical aspect of ecosystem responses to global change. The impacts of climate warming on decomposition dynamics have not been resolved due to apparently contradictory results from field and lab experiments, most of which has focused on labile carbon with short turnover times. But the majority of total soil carbon stocks are comprised of organic carbon with turnover times of decades to centuries. Understanding the response of these carbon pools to climate change is essential for forecasting longer-term changes in soil carbon storage. Herein, we briefly synthesize information from recent studies that have been conducted using a wide variety of approaches. In our effort to understand research to-date, we derive a new conceptual model that explicitly identifies the processes controlling soil OM availability for decomposition and allows a more explicit description of the factors regulating OM decomposition under different circumstances. It explicitly defines resistance of soil OM to decomposition as being due either to its chemical conformation (quality) or its physico-chemical protection from decomposition. The former is embodied in the depolymerization process, the latter by adsorption/desorption and aggregate turnover. We hypothesize a strong role for variation in temperature sensitivity as a function of reaction rates for both. We conclude that important advances in understanding the temperature response of the processes that control substrate availability, depolymerization, microbial efficiency, and enzyme production will be needed to predict the fate of soil carbon stocks in a warmer world.

Soil carbon (C) is a critical component of Earth system models (ESMs), and its diverse representations are a major source of the large spread across models in the terrestrial C sink from the third to fifth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Improving soil C projections is of a high priority for Earth system modeling in the future IPCC and other assessments. To achieve this goal, we suggest that (1) model structures should reflect real-world processes, (2) parameters should be calibrated to match model outputs with observations, and (3) external forcing variables should accurately prescribe the environmental conditions that soils experience. First, most soil C cycle models simulate C input from litter production and C release through decomposition. The latter process has traditionally been represented by first-order decay functions, regulated primarily by temperature, moisture, litter quality, and soil texture. While this formulation well captures macroscopic soil organic C (SOC) dynamics, better understanding is needed of their underlying mechanisms as related to microbial processes, depth-dependent environmental controls, and other processes that strongly affect soil C dynamics. Second, incomplete use of observations in model parameterization is a major cause of bias in soil C projections from ESMs. Optimal parameter calibration with both pool-and flux-based data sets through data assimilation is LUO ET AL.SOIL CARBON MODELING 40 PUBLICATIONS

Abstract. Soil is currently thought to be a sink for carbon; however, the response of this sink to increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide and climate change is uncertain. In this study, we analyzed soil organic carbon (SOC) changes from 11 Earth system models (ESMs) contributing simulations to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5). We used a reduced complexity model based on temperature and moisture sensitivities to analyze the drivers of SOC change for the historical and high radiative forcing (RCP 8.5) scenarios between 1850 and 2100. ESM estimates of SOC changed over the 21st century (2090–2099 minus 1997–2006) ranging from a loss of 72 Pg C to a gain of 253 Pg C with a multi-model mean gain of 65 Pg C. Many ESMs simulated large changes in high-latitude SOC that ranged from losses of 37 Pg C to gains of 146 Pg C with a multi-model mean gain of 39 Pg C across tundra and boreal biomes. All ESMs showed cumulative increases in global NPP (11 to 59%) and decreases in SOC turnover times (15 to 28%) over the 21st century. Most of the model-to-model variation in SOC change was explained by initial SOC stocks combined with the relative changes in soil inputs and decomposition rates (R2 = 0.89, p < 0.01). Between models, increases in decomposition rate were well explained by a combination of initial decomposition rate, ESM-specific Q10-factors, and changes in soil temperature (R2 = 0.80, p < 0.01). All SOC changes depended on sustained increases in NPP with global change (primarily driven by increasing CO2). Many ESMs simulated large accumulations of SOC in high-latitude biomes that are not consistent with empirical studies. Most ESMs poorly represented permafrost dynamics and omitted potential constraints on SOC storage, such as priming effects, nutrient availability, mineral surface stabilization, and aggregate formation. Future models that represent these constraints are likely to estimate smaller increases in SOC storage over the 21st century.

No abstract

Microbes influence soil organic matter decomposition and the long‐term stabilization of carbon (C) in soils. We contend that by revising the representation of microbial processes and their interactions with the physicochemical soil environment, Earth system models (ESMs) will make more realistic global C cycle projections. Explicit representation of microbial processes presents considerable challenges due to the scale at which these processes occur. Thus, applying microbial theory in ESMs requires a framework to link micro‐scale process‐level understanding and measurements to macro‐scale models used to make decadal‐ to century‐long projections. Here we review the diversity, advantages, and pitfalls of simulating soil biogeochemical cycles using microbial‐explicit modeling approaches. We present a roadmap for how to begin building, applying, and evaluating reliable microbial‐explicit model formulations that can be applied in ESMs. Drawing from experience with traditional decomposition models, we suggest the following: (1) guidelines for common model parameters and output that can facilitate future model intercomparisons; (2) development of benchmarking and model‐data integration frameworks that can be used to effectively guide, inform, and evaluate model parameterizations with data from well‐curated repositories; and (3) the application of scaling methods to integrate microbial‐explicit soil biogeochemistry modules within ESMs. With contributions across scientific disciplines, we feel this roadmap can advance our fundamental understanding of soil biogeochemical dynamics and more realistically project likely soil C response to environmental change at global scales.