Cargando…

The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?

Climate warming can reduce global soil carbon stocks by enhancing microbial decomposition. However, the magnitude of this loss remains uncertain because the temperature sensitivity of the decomposition of the major fraction of soil carbon, namely resistant carbon, is not fully known. It is now belie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liáng, Lìyǐn L., Kirschbaum, Miko U. F., Arcus, Vickery L., Schipper, Louis A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10099867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36420956
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16539
_version_ 1785025150492606464
author Liáng, Lìyǐn L.
Kirschbaum, Miko U. F.
Arcus, Vickery L.
Schipper, Louis A.
author_facet Liáng, Lìyǐn L.
Kirschbaum, Miko U. F.
Arcus, Vickery L.
Schipper, Louis A.
author_sort Liáng, Lìyǐn L.
collection PubMed
description Climate warming can reduce global soil carbon stocks by enhancing microbial decomposition. However, the magnitude of this loss remains uncertain because the temperature sensitivity of the decomposition of the major fraction of soil carbon, namely resistant carbon, is not fully known. It is now believed that the resistance of soil carbon mostly depends on microbial accessibility of soil carbon with physical protection being the primary control of the decomposition of protected carbon, which is insensitive to temperature changes. However, it is still unclear whether the temperature sensitivity of the decomposition of unprotected carbon, for example, carbon that is not protected by the soil mineral matrix, may depend on the chemical recalcitrance of carbon compounds. In particular, the carbon‐quality temperature (CQT) hypothesis asserts that recalcitrant low‐quality carbon is more temperature‐sensitive to decomposition than labile high‐quality carbon. If the hypothesis is correct, climate warming could amplify the loss of unprotected, but chemically recalcitrant, carbon and the resultant CO(2) release from soils to the atmosphere. Previous research has supported this hypothesis based on reported negative relationships between temperature sensitivity and carbon quality, defined as the decomposition rate at a reference temperature. Here we show that negative relationships can arise simply from the arbitrary choice of reference temperature, inherently invalidating those tests. To avoid this artefact, we defined the carbon quality of different compounds as their uncatalysed reaction rates in the absence of enzymes. Taking the uncatalysed rate as the carbon quality index, we found that the CQT hypothesis is not supported for enzyme‐catalysed reactions, which showed no relationship between carbon quality and temperature sensitivity. The lack of correlation in enzyme‐catalysed reactions implies similar temperature sensitivity for microbial decomposition of soil carbon, regardless of its quality, thereby allaying concerns of acceleration of warming‐induced decomposition of recalcitrant carbon.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10099867
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100998672023-04-14 The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact? Liáng, Lìyǐn L. Kirschbaum, Miko U. F. Arcus, Vickery L. Schipper, Louis A. Glob Chang Biol Opinions Climate warming can reduce global soil carbon stocks by enhancing microbial decomposition. However, the magnitude of this loss remains uncertain because the temperature sensitivity of the decomposition of the major fraction of soil carbon, namely resistant carbon, is not fully known. It is now believed that the resistance of soil carbon mostly depends on microbial accessibility of soil carbon with physical protection being the primary control of the decomposition of protected carbon, which is insensitive to temperature changes. However, it is still unclear whether the temperature sensitivity of the decomposition of unprotected carbon, for example, carbon that is not protected by the soil mineral matrix, may depend on the chemical recalcitrance of carbon compounds. In particular, the carbon‐quality temperature (CQT) hypothesis asserts that recalcitrant low‐quality carbon is more temperature‐sensitive to decomposition than labile high‐quality carbon. If the hypothesis is correct, climate warming could amplify the loss of unprotected, but chemically recalcitrant, carbon and the resultant CO(2) release from soils to the atmosphere. Previous research has supported this hypothesis based on reported negative relationships between temperature sensitivity and carbon quality, defined as the decomposition rate at a reference temperature. Here we show that negative relationships can arise simply from the arbitrary choice of reference temperature, inherently invalidating those tests. To avoid this artefact, we defined the carbon quality of different compounds as their uncatalysed reaction rates in the absence of enzymes. Taking the uncatalysed rate as the carbon quality index, we found that the CQT hypothesis is not supported for enzyme‐catalysed reactions, which showed no relationship between carbon quality and temperature sensitivity. The lack of correlation in enzyme‐catalysed reactions implies similar temperature sensitivity for microbial decomposition of soil carbon, regardless of its quality, thereby allaying concerns of acceleration of warming‐induced decomposition of recalcitrant carbon. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-11-30 2023-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10099867/ /pubmed/36420956 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16539 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Opinions
Liáng, Lìyǐn L.
Kirschbaum, Miko U. F.
Arcus, Vickery L.
Schipper, Louis A.
The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title_full The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title_fullStr The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title_full_unstemmed The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title_short The carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: Fact or artefact?
title_sort carbon‐quality temperature hypothesis: fact or artefact?
topic Opinions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10099867/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36420956
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16539
work_keys_str_mv AT liangliyinl thecarbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT kirschbaummikouf thecarbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT arcusvickeryl thecarbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT schipperlouisa thecarbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT liangliyinl carbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT kirschbaummikouf carbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT arcusvickeryl carbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact
AT schipperlouisa carbonqualitytemperaturehypothesisfactorartefact