Effects of sample size and position from monolith and core methods on the estimation of total root biomass in a temperate grassland ecosystem in Inner Mongolia

Ping, Xiaoyan; Zhou, Guangsheng; Zhuang, Qianlai; Wang, Yunlong; Zuo, Wanqing; GuangXu, Shi; Lin, Xianglei; Wang, Yuhui

doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.12.009

Cited by 25 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because of the tap roots of lucerne, we speculate that our sampling method (auger with inner diameter 2 cm) did not capture adequate and representative root biomass from these plots. Ping et al (2010) also measured lower root biomass of grasses mixture and lucerne, respectively, during soil sampling using an auger compared to soil monoliths.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Grassland carbon sequestration and emissions following cultivation in a mixed crop rotation

Acharya

Rasmussen

Eriksen

2012

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tGrasslands are potential carbon sinks to reduce unprecedented increase in atmospheric CO 2 . Effect of age (1-4-year-old) and management (slurry, grazing multispecies mixture) of a grass phase mixed crop rotation on carbon sequestration and emissions upon cultivation was compared with 17-year-old grassland and a pea field as reference. Aboveground and root biomass were determined and soils were incubated to study CO 2 emissions after soil disturbance. Aboveground biomass was highest in 1-year-old grassland with slurry application and lowest in 4-year-old grassland without slurry application. Root biomass was highest in 4-year-old grassland, but all 1-4-year-old grasslands were in between the pea field (0.81 ± 0.094 g kg −1 soil) and the 17-year-old grassland (3.17 ± 0.22 g kg −1 soil). Grazed grasslands had significantly higher root biomass than cut grasslands. There was no significant difference in the CO 2 emissions within 1-4-year-old grasslands. Only the 17-year-old grassland showed markedly higher CO 2 emissions (4.9 ± 1.1 g CO 2 kg −1 soil). Differences in aboveground and root biomass did not affect CO 2 emissions, and slurry application did not either. The substantial increase in root biomass with age but indifference in CO 2 emissions across the age and management in temporary grasslands, thus, indicates potential for long-term sequestration of soil C.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…3), which was unexpected. But it should be noted that root biomass is often affected by root recovery methods (Ping et al, 2010) and possibly fluctuates throughout the year (Pucheta et al, 2004). Exclusion of the 3-year-old grasslands, however, resulted in an increasing trend of root biomass with age of grassland (R 2 = 0.85).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grassland carbon sequestration and emissions following cultivation in a mixed crop rotation

Acharya

Rasmussen

Eriksen

2012

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the present study, the average root biomass found in desert grassland was 919.07 ± 321.93 g m -2 , which was higher than the average of 855.0 g m -2 found across desert grasslands of terrestrial ecosystems in China, based on the ratio of root/shoot (Fang et al 1996) and lower than that of 301.0 g m -2 found in a desert grassland of Inner Mongolia in China (Ma et al 2008). This might be caused by the different sampling depths, sample size, calculation methods, different sampling timing and positions in these studies (Ping et al 2010). In addition, it might be related to the different research regions, and environmental conditions were also an important factor.…”

Section: Effect Of Grassland Type On Root Distributionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Root biomass distribution in alpine ecosystems of the northern Tibetan Plateau

Zhang

et al. 2011

Environ Earth Sci

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The root biomass distribution in alpine ecosystems (alpine meadow, alpine steppe, desert grassland and alpine desert) was investigated along a transect on the northern Tibetan Plateau in 2009. The results showed that roots were mainly concentrated in the 0-20 cm layer, and root biomass decreased exponentially with increasing soil depth. Root biomass was estimated to be 1,381.41 ± 245.29 g m -2 in the top 20 cm soil, accounting for 85% of the total root biomass. The distribution pattern of the root biomass proportion along the soil profile was similar in different alpine ecosystems. The root biomass density varied with different alpine ecosystems and the total average root biomass was 1,626.08 ± 301.76 g m -2 . Root biomass was significantly correlated with average relative humidity, annual precipitation and soil organic matter. This indicates that precipitation and soil organic matter might be crucial for plant growth in the study area, while temperature is not an important factor controlling root growth.

show abstract

“…These differences in mass alone can underestimate root content by 1/3 [42]. While more accurate methods of belowground biomass sampling use soil monoliths and trench sampling, an adequate sample volume has yet to be determined [42,44]. Since SOC accumulates at different rates within different soil depths during site regeneration [20], the most accurate sampling methodology is to repetitively sample soil at 1-2 m depth at the same site.…”

Section: Pool-specific Methodological Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands

DiRocco

Ramage

Evans

et al. 2014

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial discussion exists concerning the best land use options for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on marginal land. Emissions-mitigating land use options include displacement of fossil fuels via biofuel production and afforestation. Comparing C recovery dynamics under these different options is crucial to assessing the efficacy of offset programs. In this paper, we focus on forest recovery on marginal land, and show that there is substantial inaccuracy and discrepancy in the literature concerning carbon accumulation. We find that uncertainty in carbon accumulation occurs in estimations of carbon stocks and models of carbon dynamics over time. We suggest that analyses to date have been largely unsuccessful at determining reliable trends in site recovery due to broad land use categories, a failure to consider the effect of current and post-restoration management, and problems with meta-analysis. Understanding of C recovery could be greatly improved with increased data collection on pre-restoration site quality, prior land use history, and management practices as well as increased methodological standardization. Finally, given the current and likely future uncertainty in C dynamics, we recommend carbon mitigation potential should not be the only environmental service driving land use decisions on marginal lands. OPEN ACCESSForests 2014, 5 848

show abstract

Effects of sample size and position from monolith and core methods on the estimation of total root biomass in a temperate grassland ecosystem in Inner Mongolia

Cited by 25 publications

References 50 publications

Grassland carbon sequestration and emissions following cultivation in a mixed crop rotation

Grassland carbon sequestration and emissions following cultivation in a mixed crop rotation

Root biomass distribution in alpine ecosystems of the northern Tibetan Plateau

Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About