Cited by 653Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyMarine and coastal ecosystems

The carbon we do not see—the impact of low molecular weight compounds on carbon dynamics and respiration in forest soils: a review

van Hees, Patrick A.W., Jones, David L., Finlay, Roger, Godbold, Douglas L., Lundström, Ulla S.·2005·Soil Biology and Biochemistry

Abstract

Dissolved organic matter (DOM), typically quantified as dissolved organic carbon (DOC), has been hypothesized to play many roles in pedogenesis and soil biogeochemical cycles, however, most research to date concerning forest soils has focussed on the high molecular weight (HMW) components of this DOM. This review aims to assess the role of low molecular weight (LMW) DOM compounds in the C dynamics of temperate and boreal forest soils focussing in particular on organic acids, amino acids and sugars. The current knowledge of concentrations, mineralization kinetics and production rates and sources in soil are summarised. We conclude that although these LMW compounds are typically maintained at very low concentrations in the soil solution (< 50 micromolar), the flux through this pool is extremely rapid (mean residence time 1-10 h) due to continued microbial removal. Due to this rapid flux through the soil solution pool and mineralization to CO2, we calculate that the turnover of these LMW compounds may contribute substantially to the total CO2 efflux from the soil. Moreover, the production rates of these soluble transitory compounds could exceed HMW DOM production. The possible impact of climate change on the behaviour of LMW compounds in soil is also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.06.010

Cites

70 of 70 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?

  • In forest soils, the soil microbial biomass assimilated 70 % of the DOC and respired the remaining 30 %.

    “Similar conclusions were reached for DOC in forest soils [157], where the soil microbial biomass assimilated 70 % of the DOC and respired the remaining 30 %.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Hees, P. A. W., Jones, D. L., Finlay, R., Godbold, D. L., & Lundström, U. S.
Affiliations
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
  • Bangor University (GB)
  • Mid Sweden University (SE)
Venue
Soil Biology and Biochemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-01
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
1-13
ISSN
0038-0717 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071030867
Cited by
653
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 34
FWCI
4.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Soil Biology and Biochemistry (publishedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine and coastal ecosystems
Keywords
forest soils, soil respiration, soil carbon dynamics, organic acids, amino acids, sugar, mineralization kinetics, turnover time, soil pore water, microbial degradation, CO2 efflux, temperate and boreal forests, climate change impacts, dissolved organic carbon

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