2020
DOI: 10.5194/bg-2020-63
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interactions between biogeochemical and management factors explain soil organic carbon in Pyrenean grasslands

Abstract: Abstract. Grasslands are one of the major sinks of terrestrial soil organic carbon (SOC). Understanding how environmental and management factors drive SOC is challenging because they are scale-dependent, with large scale drivers affecting SOC both directly and through drivers working at detailed spatial scales. Here we addressed how regional, landscape and grazing management, soil properties and nutrients and herbage quality factors affect SOC in mountain grasslands in the Pyrenees. Taking advantage of the hig… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We used CANOCO 5 for all the analyses [54]. The explanatory sets initially included all the variables recorded in the study: (a) environmental (climatic, management, and soil descriptors) variables: mean annual air temperature (MAT), mean annual precipitation (MAP), mean annual minimum air temperature (MTmin), mean annual maximum air temperature (MTmax), mean summer air temperature (MST), mean summer precipitation (MSP), the Temperature Seasonality Index of Sebastià (TSIS = MST − MAT; see Table 1), as in Rodríguez et al 2020 [55], grazer type (represented through two dummy variables, sheep grazing and cattle grazing), and pH and moisture determined for each sampled soil; (b) plant functional diversity variables: PFT evenness, biomass proportion of grasses, legume, and non-legume forbs (thereupon, legumes and forbs), and the pairwise interactions between the three plant PFTs. We did not have enough degrees of freedom to reliably include interactions between PFT diversity components and other environmental variables in our redundancy analysis.…”
Section: Gradient Analysis and Variation Partitioningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used CANOCO 5 for all the analyses [54]. The explanatory sets initially included all the variables recorded in the study: (a) environmental (climatic, management, and soil descriptors) variables: mean annual air temperature (MAT), mean annual precipitation (MAP), mean annual minimum air temperature (MTmin), mean annual maximum air temperature (MTmax), mean summer air temperature (MST), mean summer precipitation (MSP), the Temperature Seasonality Index of Sebastià (TSIS = MST − MAT; see Table 1), as in Rodríguez et al 2020 [55], grazer type (represented through two dummy variables, sheep grazing and cattle grazing), and pH and moisture determined for each sampled soil; (b) plant functional diversity variables: PFT evenness, biomass proportion of grasses, legume, and non-legume forbs (thereupon, legumes and forbs), and the pairwise interactions between the three plant PFTs. We did not have enough degrees of freedom to reliably include interactions between PFT diversity components and other environmental variables in our redundancy analysis.…”
Section: Gradient Analysis and Variation Partitioningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The organic C fraction was determined by subtracting inorganic C in the carbonates from the total C. Soil organic carbon stocks (SOC) in the upper 20 cm soil layer were then estimated taking into account the organic C concentration in the sample and its bulk density, and subtracting the coarse particle (> 2 mm) content, following García-Pausas et al (2007). See Rodriguez et al 2020 for further details about SOC sampling and determination.…”
Section: Soc Sampling and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%