Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Meyer, N.
dc.contributor.author Welp, G.
dc.contributor.author Amelung, W.
dc.date.accessioned 2019-12-18T23:01:22Z
dc.date.available 2019-12-18T23:01:22Z
dc.date.issued 2019-11
dc.identifier.citation Meyer , N , Welp , G & Amelung , W 2019 , ' Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany ' , Biology and Fertility of Soils , vol. 55 , no. 8 , pp. 825-832 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-019-01374-7
dc.identifier.other PURE: 126266920
dc.identifier.other PURE UUID: 680a825b-b26d-4cc1-b501-d76f57d9a6f9
dc.identifier.other RIS: urn:19854F1C7FD93B7A53DB6F76E23E32A5
dc.identifier.other RIS: Meyer2019
dc.identifier.other WOS: 000494475700007
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10138/308543
dc.description.abstract Knowledge about spatial patterns of soil respiration (SR) and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) is of emerging relevance for assessing carbon fluxes across the landscape. Related experiments are often conducted under controlled laboratory conditions and usually rely on soil samples, which are sieved and stored. Here, we investigated the effect of sieving and storage on SR and Q10. We took 14 samples from different land use types and soil textures. Samples were sieved to 2 mm at field-moist conditions and split into four treatments: sieved/no-storage, sieved/freeze-storage (−18  °C), sieved/cold-storage (+ 4 °C), and sieved/dry-storage (+ 40 °C). The storage time was 7 weeks. Intact soil cores were used as a control. The SR was not significantly affected by sieving/no-storage, sieving/freeze-storage, and sieving/cold-storage compared with the control. Yet, sieving/dry-storage significantly increased SR but all samples were similarly affected (r = 0.81 for the correlation between SR after sieving/dry-storage and SR in the control). The Q10 of sieving/no-storage (1.94 ± 0.28), sieving/freeze-storage (1.94 ± 0.23), sieving/cold-storage (2.37 ± 0.29), and sieving/dry-storage (2.29 ± 1.35) did not differ significantly from the control (2.12 ± 0.23). All samples responded similar to sieving and storage (r = 0.68–0.73 for the correlation between Q10 in each respective treatment and Q10 in the control), with the exception of sieved/dry-storage (r = 0.09). We conclude that sieving at field-moist conditions and subsequent freeze- or cold-storage is acceptable to derive SR and Q10 for the here reported storage time. Although dry-storage may be acceptable for the comparison of SR between samples, it should be avoided for realistic estimates of SR and for the determination of Q10. en
dc.format.extent 8
dc.language.iso eng
dc.relation.ispartof Biology and Fertility of Soils
dc.rights cc_by
dc.rights.uri info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject 415 Other agricultural sciences
dc.subject 1171 Geosciences
dc.subject Heterotrophic soil respiration
dc.subject Carbon mineralization
dc.subject Soil pretreatment
dc.subject Drying and rewetting
dc.subject WATER-CONTENT
dc.subject CARBON
dc.subject MOISTURE
dc.subject DEPENDENCE
dc.subject PATTERNS
dc.subject SURFACE
dc.subject MODEL
dc.title Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany en
dc.type Article
dc.contributor.organization Soils and climate change
dc.contributor.organization Department of Forest Sciences
dc.description.reviewstatus Peer reviewed
dc.relation.doi https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-019-01374-7
dc.relation.issn 1432-0789
dc.rights.accesslevel openAccess
dc.type.version publishedVersion

Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
Meyer2019_Artic ... SievingAndSampleStorag.pdf 728.0Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record