|Title||Reconciling Carbon-cycle Concepts, Terminology, and Methods|
|Publication Type||Journal Article|
|Year of Publication||2006|
|Authors||Chapin, III F.S, Woodwell G.M, Randerson J.T, Rastetter E.B, Lovett G.M, Baldocchi D.D, Clark D.A, Harmon M.E, Schimel D.S, Valentini R., Wirth C., Aber J.D, Cole J.J, Goulden M.L, Harden J.W, Heimann M., Howarth R.W, Matson P.A, McGuire A.D, Melillo J.M, Mooney H.A, Neff J.C, Houghton R.A, Pace M.L, Ryan M.G, Running S.W, Sala O.E, Schlesinger W.H., Schulze E.-D|
|Keywords||article, autotrophic respiration, ecosystem respiration, gross primary production, heterotrophic respiration, journal, net biome production, net ecosystem carbon balance, net ecosystem exchange, net ecosystem production, net primary production|
Recent projections of climatic change have focused a great deal of scientific and public attention on patterns of carbon (C) cycling as well as its controls, particularly the factors that determine whether an ecosystem is a net source or sink of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). Net ecosystem production (NEP), a central concept in C-cycling research, has been used by scientists to represent two different concepts. We propose that NEP be restricted to just one of its two original definitions—the imbalance between gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (ER). We further propose that a new term—net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB)—be applied to the net rate of C accumulation in (or loss from [negative sign]) ecosystems. Net ecosystem carbon balance differs from NEP when C fluxes other than C fixation and respiration occur, or when inorganic C enters or leaves in dissolved form. These fluxes include the leaching loss or lateral transfer of C from the ecosystem; the emission of volatile organic C, methane, and carbon monoxide; and the release of soot and CO2 from fire. Carbon fluxes in addition to NEP are particularly important determinants of NECB over long time scales. However, even over short time scales, they are important in ecosystems such as streams, estuaries, wetlands, and cities. Recent technological advances have led to a diversity of approaches to the measurement of C fluxes at different temporal and spatial scales. These approaches frequently capture different components of NEP or NECB and can therefore be compared across scales only by carefully specifying the fluxes included in the measurements. By explicitly identifying the fluxes that comprise NECB and other components of the C cycle, such as net ecosystem exchange (NEE) and net biome production (NBP), we can provide a less ambiguous framework for understanding and communicating recent changes in the global C cycle.
|Reprint Edition||In File (08/14/2007)|