Predicting long-term patterns of mass loss, nitrogen dynamics, and soil organic matter formation from initial fine litter chemistry in temperate forest ecosystems
Abstract
Long-term decomposition data are presented for several types of foliar and fine root litter in different stands in Wisconsin and Massachusetts, U.S.A. Changes in mass remaining as well as nitrogen and carbon fraction (extractives, cellulose, lignin) concentration are reported. Three models were developed for describing change in mass remaining with time: a litter-specific exponential decay function (statistical fit of data for each litter type), a generalized exponential decay function (k predicted from initial litter chemistry), and a carbon fraction model that calculates the weight loss of each carbon fraction individually as a function of current carbon chemistry regardless of litter type. The exponential decay function fits all litter data well for the portion of decomposition described here, but would not be appropriate for modeling longer term decomposition. Both the generalized and carbon fraction models predicted weight loss accurately. All litter types had similar carbon fraction chemistries at the end of the first phase of decomposition described here and also exhibited a narrow range of changes in nitrogen concentration per unit weight loss. It is concluded that the length of time required to convert litter into soil organic matter and the chemistry of the material produced by this process can be predicted from initial litter chemistry and (or) relatively short-term litter decay data. Key words: immobilization, mineralization, humus, lignin, cellulose, extractives.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Physical protection defines the kinetic properties and temperature sensitivity of soil organic carbon pools.
“The latter defines their kinetic properties and temperature sensitivity [145, 146].”
From Carbon Sequestration by Perennial Energy Crops: Is the Jury Still Out? (2015) · cites this paper as [145]
Cites
Forest Litter Decomposition in Relation to Soil Nitrogen Dynamics and Litter Quality
McClaugherty, C. A., Pastor, J., Aber, J. D., & Melillo, J. M. (1985) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1941327 · Cited by 593 · see citing works
Self-citationChen, H., Harmon, M., & Griffiths, R. (2001) · Canadian Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1139/x00-167 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Aerts, R. (1997) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3546886 · Cited by 1,786 · see citing works
Biodiversity and Litter Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems
Hättenschwiler, S., Tiunov, A. V., & Scheu, S. (2005) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.112904.151932 · Cited by 1,674 · see citing works
Global-Scale Similarities in Nitrogen Release Patterns During Long-Term Decomposition
Parton, W., Silver, W. L., Burke, I. C., Grassens, L., Harmon, M. E., Currie, W. S., King, J. Y., Adair, E. C., Brandt, L. A., Hart, S. C., et al. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1134853 · Cited by 1,326 · see citing works
Carbon Sequestration by Perennial Energy Crops: Is the Jury Still Out?
Agostini, F., Gregory, A. S., & Richter, G. M. (2015) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-014-9571-0 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Climate and litter quality controls on decomposition: An analysis of modeling approaches
Moorhead, D. L., Currie, W. S., Rastetter, E. B., Parton, W. J., & Harmon, M. E. (1999) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/1998gb900014 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Non-additive effects of litter mixtures on net N mineralization in a southern New England forest
Finzi, A. C., & Canham, C. D. (1998) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(97)00277-6 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Calibration of the RothC model to turnover of soil carbon under eucalypts and pines
Paul, K. I., & Polglase, P. J. (2004) · Soil Research · doi:10.1071/sr04025 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Ledo, A., Heathcote, R., Hastings, A., Smith, P., & Hillier, J. (2018) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.12.005 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“Tocalculate the remainingbiomassof roots thatdie for the IBM,we used the widely-used decay function proposed by Aber et al. (1990): mass ¼ e kt (30) where mass is the remaining mass, k is the decay constant and t is the time in years.”
Method
- Authors
- Aber, J. D., Melillo, J. M., & McClaugherty, C. A.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Botany
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1990-10-01
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2201-2208
- ISSN
- 0008-4026 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039074462
- Cited by
- 529
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 11.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- fr
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Botany (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental and biological studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
- Keywords
- litter decomposition, fine root litter, leaf litter, nitrogen dynamics, soil organic matter formation, nitrogen immobilization, nitrogen mineralization, lignin, cellulose, extractives, exponential decay model, temperate forests, humification
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