Cited by 1,030Climate change and permafrostSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology

Ecosystem carbon storage in arctic tundra reduced by long-term nutrient fertilization

Mack, Michelle C., Schuur, Edward A. G., Bret-Harte, M. Syndonia, Shaver, Gaius R., Chapin, F. Stuart·2004·Nature

Abstract

Global warming is predicted to be most pronounced at high latitudes, and observational evidence over the past 25 years suggests that this warming is already under way. One-third of the global soil carbon pool is stored in northern latitudes, so there is considerable interest in understanding how the carbon balance of northern ecosystems will respond to climate warming. Observations of controls over plant productivity in tundra and boreal ecosystems have been used to build a conceptual model of response to warming, where warmer soils and increased decomposition of plant litter increase nutrient availability, which, in turn, stimulates plant production and increases ecosystem carbon storage. Here we present the results of a long-term fertilization experiment in Alaskan tundra, in which increased nutrient availability caused a net ecosystem loss of almost 2,000 grams of carbon per square meter over 20 years. We found that annual aboveground plant production doubled during the experiment. Losses of carbon and nitrogen from deep soil layers, however, were substantial and more than offset the increased carbon and nitrogen storage in plant biomass and litter. Our study suggests that projected release of soil nutrients associated with high-latitude warming may further amplify carbon release from soils, causing a net loss of ecosystem carbon and a positive feedback to climate warming.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature02887

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • If stimulation of decomposition exceeds production caused by fertilization, there would ultimately be a net C loss from the ecosystem.

    “If the stimulation of decomposition is more than production caused by fertilization, there would ultimately be a net C loss from the ecosystem.167”

    From Technologies and perspectives for achieving carbon neutrality (2021) · cites this paper as [167]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mack, M. C., Schuur, E. A. G., Bret-Harte, M. S., Shaver, G. R., & Chapin, F. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Alaska Fairbanks (US)
  • Marine Biological Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Mack, Michelle C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2004-09
Volume
431
Issue
7007
Pages
440-443
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2031808375
Cited by
1,030
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 60 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 52
FWCI
19.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Climate change and permafrost
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Keywords
Arctic tundra, ecosystem carbon storage, nutrient fertilization, soil carbon emissions, nitrogen cycling, plant productivity, global warming, positive feedback, boreal ecosystems, litter decomposition, long-term fertilization experiment
MeSH terms
Arctic Regions, Carbon, Cold Climate, Fertilizers, Nitrogen, Plants, Soil, Time Factors, Greenhouse Effect, Ecosystem, Biomass

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