Cargando…
Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars
Pyrogenic carbon (PyC), produced naturally (wildfire charcoal) and anthropogenically (biochar), is extensively studied due to its importance in several disciplines, including global climate dynamics, agronomy and paleosciences. Charcoal and biochar are commonly used as analogues for each other to in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5594023/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28894167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10455-2 |
_version_ | 1783263145294299136 |
---|---|
author | Santín, Cristina Doerr, Stefan H. Merino, Agustin Bucheli, Thomas D. Bryant, Rob Ascough, Philippa Gao, Xiaodong Masiello, Caroline A. |
author_facet | Santín, Cristina Doerr, Stefan H. Merino, Agustin Bucheli, Thomas D. Bryant, Rob Ascough, Philippa Gao, Xiaodong Masiello, Caroline A. |
author_sort | Santín, Cristina |
collection | PubMed |
description | Pyrogenic carbon (PyC), produced naturally (wildfire charcoal) and anthropogenically (biochar), is extensively studied due to its importance in several disciplines, including global climate dynamics, agronomy and paleosciences. Charcoal and biochar are commonly used as analogues for each other to infer respective carbon sequestration potentials, production conditions, and environmental roles and fates. The direct comparability of corresponding natural and anthropogenic PyC, however, has never been tested. Here we compared key physicochemical properties (elemental composition, δ(13)C and PAHs signatures, chemical recalcitrance, density and porosity) and carbon sequestration potentials of PyC materials formed from two identical feedstocks (pine forest floor and wood) under wildfire charring- and slow-pyrolysis conditions. Wildfire charcoals were formed under higher maximum temperatures and oxygen availabilities, but much shorter heating durations than slow-pyrolysis biochars, resulting in differing physicochemical properties. These differences are particularly relevant regarding their respective roles as carbon sinks, as even the wildfire charcoals formed at the highest temperatures had lower carbon sequestration potentials than most slow-pyrolysis biochars. Our results challenge the common notion that natural charcoal and biochar are well suited as proxies for each other, and suggest that biochar’s environmental residence time may be underestimated when based on natural charcoal as a proxy, and vice versa. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5594023 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55940232017-09-14 Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars Santín, Cristina Doerr, Stefan H. Merino, Agustin Bucheli, Thomas D. Bryant, Rob Ascough, Philippa Gao, Xiaodong Masiello, Caroline A. Sci Rep Article Pyrogenic carbon (PyC), produced naturally (wildfire charcoal) and anthropogenically (biochar), is extensively studied due to its importance in several disciplines, including global climate dynamics, agronomy and paleosciences. Charcoal and biochar are commonly used as analogues for each other to infer respective carbon sequestration potentials, production conditions, and environmental roles and fates. The direct comparability of corresponding natural and anthropogenic PyC, however, has never been tested. Here we compared key physicochemical properties (elemental composition, δ(13)C and PAHs signatures, chemical recalcitrance, density and porosity) and carbon sequestration potentials of PyC materials formed from two identical feedstocks (pine forest floor and wood) under wildfire charring- and slow-pyrolysis conditions. Wildfire charcoals were formed under higher maximum temperatures and oxygen availabilities, but much shorter heating durations than slow-pyrolysis biochars, resulting in differing physicochemical properties. These differences are particularly relevant regarding their respective roles as carbon sinks, as even the wildfire charcoals formed at the highest temperatures had lower carbon sequestration potentials than most slow-pyrolysis biochars. Our results challenge the common notion that natural charcoal and biochar are well suited as proxies for each other, and suggest that biochar’s environmental residence time may be underestimated when based on natural charcoal as a proxy, and vice versa. Nature Publishing Group UK 2017-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5594023/ /pubmed/28894167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10455-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Santín, Cristina Doerr, Stefan H. Merino, Agustin Bucheli, Thomas D. Bryant, Rob Ascough, Philippa Gao, Xiaodong Masiello, Caroline A. Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title | Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title_full | Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title_fullStr | Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title_full_unstemmed | Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title_short | Carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
title_sort | carbon sequestration potential and physicochemical properties differ between wildfire charcoals and slow-pyrolysis biochars |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5594023/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28894167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10455-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT santincristina carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT doerrstefanh carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT merinoagustin carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT buchelithomasd carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT bryantrob carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT ascoughphilippa carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT gaoxiaodong carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars AT masiellocarolinea carbonsequestrationpotentialandphysicochemicalpropertiesdifferbetweenwildfirecharcoalsandslowpyrolysisbiochars |