土壤碳模型的历史驱动旋转过程

IF 2.9 Q2 SOIL SCIENCE Soil Systems Pub Date : 2023-04-12 DOI:10.3390/soilsystems7020035
Serge Wiltshire, Sarah Grobe, B. Beckage
{"title":"土壤碳模型的历史驱动旋转过程","authors":"Serge Wiltshire, Sarah Grobe, B. Beckage","doi":"10.3390/soilsystems7020035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Soil process models such as RothC typically assume soil organic carbon (SOC) is in equilibrium at the beginning of each simulation run. This is not likely to be true in the real world, since recalcitrant SOC pools (notably, humified material) take many decades to re-stabilize after a land use change. The equilibrium assumption stems from a spinup method in which the model is run under a single land use until all SOC pools stabilize. To overcome this, we demonstrate an alternative spinup procedure that accounts for historical land use changes. The “steady-state” and “historical” spinup methods both impute unknown C inputs such that the modeled SOC matches empirical measurements at the beginning of the simulation and set initial SOC fractions. Holding all other parameters equal, we evaluated how each spinup affects SOC projections in simulations of agricultural land use change in the U.S. state of Vermont. We found that projected SOC trajectories for all land use scenarios are sensitive to the spinup procedure. These differences are due to disparities in imputed below-ground plant-derived carbon between the two procedures. Compared to the steady-state, imputed C in the historical spinup is higher for land uses that increase SOC (e.g., adoption of regenerative practices) and lower for land uses that decrease SOC (e.g., a transition from pasture to crops), due to the time window within which land use changes are assumed to have occurred. The novel historical spinup procedure captures important dynamics commonly missing in previous studies, representing an advancement in soil process modeling.","PeriodicalId":21908,"journal":{"name":"Soil Systems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Historically Driven Spinup Procedure for Soil Carbon Modeling\",\"authors\":\"Serge Wiltshire, Sarah Grobe, B. Beckage\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/soilsystems7020035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Soil process models such as RothC typically assume soil organic carbon (SOC) is in equilibrium at the beginning of each simulation run. This is not likely to be true in the real world, since recalcitrant SOC pools (notably, humified material) take many decades to re-stabilize after a land use change. The equilibrium assumption stems from a spinup method in which the model is run under a single land use until all SOC pools stabilize. To overcome this, we demonstrate an alternative spinup procedure that accounts for historical land use changes. The “steady-state” and “historical” spinup methods both impute unknown C inputs such that the modeled SOC matches empirical measurements at the beginning of the simulation and set initial SOC fractions. Holding all other parameters equal, we evaluated how each spinup affects SOC projections in simulations of agricultural land use change in the U.S. state of Vermont. We found that projected SOC trajectories for all land use scenarios are sensitive to the spinup procedure. These differences are due to disparities in imputed below-ground plant-derived carbon between the two procedures. Compared to the steady-state, imputed C in the historical spinup is higher for land uses that increase SOC (e.g., adoption of regenerative practices) and lower for land uses that decrease SOC (e.g., a transition from pasture to crops), due to the time window within which land use changes are assumed to have occurred. The novel historical spinup procedure captures important dynamics commonly missing in previous studies, representing an advancement in soil process modeling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Soil Systems\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Soil Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems7020035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOIL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems7020035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

土壤过程模型(如RothC)通常假设土壤有机碳(SOC)在每次模拟运行开始时处于平衡状态。这在现实世界中不太可能是真的,因为在土地利用变化后,顽固的有机碳库(特别是腐殖化材料)需要几十年才能重新稳定下来。平衡假设源于一种spinup方法,在该方法中,模型在单一土地使用下运行,直到所有SOC池稳定。为了克服这一点,我们展示了另一种spinup程序,该程序考虑了历史土地利用变化。“稳态”和“历史”自旋方法都输入未知的C输入,使模拟的SOC与模拟开始时的经验测量相匹配,并设置初始SOC分数。在保持所有其他参数相同的情况下,我们评估了在美国佛蒙特州农业用地变化模拟中,每个spinup如何影响SOC预测。我们发现,所有土地利用情景的预估SOC轨迹对旋转过程都很敏感。这些差异是由于两种方法之间估算的地下植物来源碳的差异。与稳定状态相比,由于假定土地利用发生变化的时间窗口,在历史上升过程中,增加有机碳的土地利用(例如,采用再生实践)的估算碳含量较高,而减少有机碳的土地利用(例如,从牧场向作物过渡)的估算碳含量较低。新的历史旋转过程捕获了以前研究中通常缺失的重要动力学,代表了土壤过程建模的进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Historically Driven Spinup Procedure for Soil Carbon Modeling
Soil process models such as RothC typically assume soil organic carbon (SOC) is in equilibrium at the beginning of each simulation run. This is not likely to be true in the real world, since recalcitrant SOC pools (notably, humified material) take many decades to re-stabilize after a land use change. The equilibrium assumption stems from a spinup method in which the model is run under a single land use until all SOC pools stabilize. To overcome this, we demonstrate an alternative spinup procedure that accounts for historical land use changes. The “steady-state” and “historical” spinup methods both impute unknown C inputs such that the modeled SOC matches empirical measurements at the beginning of the simulation and set initial SOC fractions. Holding all other parameters equal, we evaluated how each spinup affects SOC projections in simulations of agricultural land use change in the U.S. state of Vermont. We found that projected SOC trajectories for all land use scenarios are sensitive to the spinup procedure. These differences are due to disparities in imputed below-ground plant-derived carbon between the two procedures. Compared to the steady-state, imputed C in the historical spinup is higher for land uses that increase SOC (e.g., adoption of regenerative practices) and lower for land uses that decrease SOC (e.g., a transition from pasture to crops), due to the time window within which land use changes are assumed to have occurred. The novel historical spinup procedure captures important dynamics commonly missing in previous studies, representing an advancement in soil process modeling.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Soil Systems
Soil Systems Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth-Surface Processes
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Structural Shifts in the Soil Prokaryotic Communities Marking the Podzol-Forming Process on Sand Dumps Soil Phytomining: Recent Developments—A Review Selenium and Heavy Metals in Soil–Plant System in a Hydrogeochemical Province with High Selenium Content in Groundwater: A Case Study of the Lower Dniester Valley Tillage and Cover Crop Systems Alter Soil Particle Size Distribution in Raised-Bed-and-Furrow Row-Crop Agroecosystems Shifts in Soil Bacterial Communities under Three-Year Fertilization Management and Multiple Cropping Systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1