Cited by 23Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsForest, Soil, and Plant Ecology in ChinaForest ecology and management

Changes in soil carbon flux and carbon stock over a rotation of poplar plantations in northwest China

Zhang, Jianbiao, Shangguan, Tieliang, Meng, Ziqiang·2011·Ecological Research

Abstract

Forest soil is a major component of terrestrial ecosystems for carbon sequestration and plays an important role in the global carbon cycle. Soil carbon flux and soil carbon pools were investigated in a poplar plantation chronosequence over a rotation in northwest China. Based on continuous field observation in 2007, the results showed that mean soil CO 2 efflux rate was 5.54, 4.81, and 3.93 μmol CO 2 m −2 s −1 for stands of 2‐, 8‐, and 15‐year‐old, respectively, during the growing season. Significant differences in soil respiration of three age classes were mainly because soil temperature, carbon allocation, and fine root growth changed greatly with stand age. Multiple regression analysis suggested that soil temperature and fine root biomass in the upper layer could explain 78–85% of the variation in soil respiration. Mineral soil C stock at 0–40 cm depth was 55.77, 55.09, and 58.14 t ha −1 in the 2‐, 8‐, and 15‐year‐old stands, respectively. The average rate of soil C sequestration was 0.13 t ha −1 year −1 following afforestation on former crop lands. Although the plantations had similar management practices and soil types since their establishment, many biotic and abiotic factors such as root biomass and turnover rate, soil condition of the plantations had undergone marked changes at different development stages, which could result in the remarkable differences in soil carbon flux and storage over a rotation. Our results highlight the importance of the development stage within a rotation of poplar plantation in assessment of soil carbon budget.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11284-010-0772-5

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Values for fine roots from willow and poplar grown as short-rotation forestry are lower than for short-rotation coppice.

    “Several authors investigated fine roots from willow and poplar grown as SRC [5, 30, 81, 82, 88, 89] and SRF [72, 90–93], values for the latter being lower (Table 1).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, J., Shangguan, T., & Meng, Z.
Affiliations
Shanxi University (CN)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Jianbiao
Venue
Ecological Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11-06
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
153-161
ISSN
  • 0912-3814 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1703
OpenAlex
W2077872056
Cited by
23
References
57
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Ecological Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Forest, Soil, and Plant Ecology in China
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
Keywords
poplar plantations, soil respiration, soil carbon flux, soil carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, plantation rotation, stand age, soil temperature, fine root biomass, afforestation, chronosequence, Northwest China

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review