Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Almeida, Luís F.J.
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Hurtarte, Luis C. C., Souza, Ivan F., Soares, Emanuelle M. B., Vergütz, Leonardus, Silva, Ivo R.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.004
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/22039
Resumo: Linking plant litter biochemistry, its decomposition and soil organic matter (SOM) formation is not straightforward. In this research, we evaluated the decomposition of four biochemical fractions operationally defined as i) hot-water extractable (HWE), ii) total solvent (acetone) extractable (TSE), iii) acid-base (HNO3-KOH) unhydrolyzable cellulosic fraction (CF), and iv) acid (H2SO4) unhydrolyzable (AUR) and the transfer of C from these fractions to SOM. Each biochemical fraction was Soxhlet-extracted from isotopically labeled (13C) leaves, twigs, bark and roots of eucalypt plants (120 days old). The molecular composition of each fraction was inferred from thermochemolysis with tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH), followed by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS). For the incubation, we collected soil samples from the topsoil (0–20 cm) of a sandy-clay loam, kaolinitic Haplic Ferralsol. Four plant organs and four biochemical fractions were arranged into a (4 × 4) + 1 factorial scheme, including one control treatment (soil only). The samples were incubated at 80% of their water-holding capacity and kept under controlled temperature (25 °C). The decomposition of the biochemical fractions was monitored by determining the CO2 concentration into the headspace of the vials at 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 13, 21, 28, 38, 46, 70, 80, 92, 112, 148, 178, and 200 days after the incubation had started. After the incubation, soil samples were submitted to density followed by particle-size fractionation. HWE and CF decomposed at faster rates than TSE and AUR throughout the incubation. The soil fraction < 53 μm retained a significantly higher proportion of the initial C input of HWE (32%) and AUR (31%) than TSE (19%) or CF (15%). Light fraction of organic matter (LFOM) with density < 1.8 g cm− 3, retained a significant proportion of AUR (37%) and TSE (32%) while CF was mostly lost as CO2 (79%). Selective preservation of organic materials (e.g., long-chain lipids) within the AUR and TSE fractions appears to be a significant pathway for the formation of SOM. SOM formation through a microbial-driven pathway cannot be ruled out for any biochemical fraction evaluated, but it seems more relevant for HWE and CF. In short-term, substrate biochemistry exerts a strong influence on the conversion of eucalypt litter fractions into either CO2 or SOM. Despite inherent challenges upfront, considering such dynamics at the ecosystem level will help to improve our current understanding on C storage and CO2 emissions from soils in long-term scales.
id UFV_b6f4f94cb687a48df72fdf438704385a
oai_identifier_str oai:locus.ufv.br:123456789/22039
network_acronym_str UFV
network_name_str LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
repository_id_str 2145
spelling Almeida, Luís F.J.Hurtarte, Luis C. C.Souza, Ivan F.Soares, Emanuelle M. B.Vergütz, LeonardusSilva, Ivo R.2018-09-27T00:57:52Z2018-09-27T00:57:52Z2018-02-150016-7061https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.004http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/22039Linking plant litter biochemistry, its decomposition and soil organic matter (SOM) formation is not straightforward. In this research, we evaluated the decomposition of four biochemical fractions operationally defined as i) hot-water extractable (HWE), ii) total solvent (acetone) extractable (TSE), iii) acid-base (HNO3-KOH) unhydrolyzable cellulosic fraction (CF), and iv) acid (H2SO4) unhydrolyzable (AUR) and the transfer of C from these fractions to SOM. Each biochemical fraction was Soxhlet-extracted from isotopically labeled (13C) leaves, twigs, bark and roots of eucalypt plants (120 days old). The molecular composition of each fraction was inferred from thermochemolysis with tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH), followed by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS). For the incubation, we collected soil samples from the topsoil (0–20 cm) of a sandy-clay loam, kaolinitic Haplic Ferralsol. Four plant organs and four biochemical fractions were arranged into a (4 × 4) + 1 factorial scheme, including one control treatment (soil only). The samples were incubated at 80% of their water-holding capacity and kept under controlled temperature (25 °C). The decomposition of the biochemical fractions was monitored by determining the CO2 concentration into the headspace of the vials at 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 13, 21, 28, 38, 46, 70, 80, 92, 112, 148, 178, and 200 days after the incubation had started. After the incubation, soil samples were submitted to density followed by particle-size fractionation. HWE and CF decomposed at faster rates than TSE and AUR throughout the incubation. The soil fraction < 53 μm retained a significantly higher proportion of the initial C input of HWE (32%) and AUR (31%) than TSE (19%) or CF (15%). Light fraction of organic matter (LFOM) with density < 1.8 g cm− 3, retained a significant proportion of AUR (37%) and TSE (32%) while CF was mostly lost as CO2 (79%). Selective preservation of organic materials (e.g., long-chain lipids) within the AUR and TSE fractions appears to be a significant pathway for the formation of SOM. SOM formation through a microbial-driven pathway cannot be ruled out for any biochemical fraction evaluated, but it seems more relevant for HWE and CF. In short-term, substrate biochemistry exerts a strong influence on the conversion of eucalypt litter fractions into either CO2 or SOM. Despite inherent challenges upfront, considering such dynamics at the ecosystem level will help to improve our current understanding on C storage and CO2 emissions from soils in long-term scales.engGeodermaVolume 312, Pages 121-129, February 2018Elsevier B. V.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSoil organic matterCO2 partitioningBiochemical fractionsLitter biochemistrySoil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation studyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfreponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFVinstname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)instacron:UFVORIGINALartigo.pdfartigo.pdfTexto completoapplication/pdf1053222https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/1/artigo.pdf3c38193e8e2c7d367621f9858c5d0534MD51LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81748https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/2/license.txt8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33MD52THUMBNAILartigo.pdf.jpgartigo.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg5790https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/3/artigo.pdf.jpg50e04d02ff0138ae03c4a4318de4233cMD53123456789/220392018-09-26 23:00:59.078oai:locus.ufv.br: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Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://www.locus.ufv.br/oai/requestfabiojreis@ufv.bropendoar:21452018-09-27T02:00:59LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)false
dc.title.en.fl_str_mv Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
title Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
spellingShingle Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
Almeida, Luís F.J.
Soil organic matter
CO2 partitioning
Biochemical fractions
Litter biochemistry
title_short Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
title_full Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
title_fullStr Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
title_full_unstemmed Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
title_sort Soil organic matter formation as affected by eucalypt litter biochemistry — Evidence from an incubation study
author Almeida, Luís F.J.
author_facet Almeida, Luís F.J.
Hurtarte, Luis C. C.
Souza, Ivan F.
Soares, Emanuelle M. B.
Vergütz, Leonardus
Silva, Ivo R.
author_role author
author2 Hurtarte, Luis C. C.
Souza, Ivan F.
Soares, Emanuelle M. B.
Vergütz, Leonardus
Silva, Ivo R.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Almeida, Luís F.J.
Hurtarte, Luis C. C.
Souza, Ivan F.
Soares, Emanuelle M. B.
Vergütz, Leonardus
Silva, Ivo R.
dc.subject.pt-BR.fl_str_mv Soil organic matter
CO2 partitioning
Biochemical fractions
Litter biochemistry
topic Soil organic matter
CO2 partitioning
Biochemical fractions
Litter biochemistry
description Linking plant litter biochemistry, its decomposition and soil organic matter (SOM) formation is not straightforward. In this research, we evaluated the decomposition of four biochemical fractions operationally defined as i) hot-water extractable (HWE), ii) total solvent (acetone) extractable (TSE), iii) acid-base (HNO3-KOH) unhydrolyzable cellulosic fraction (CF), and iv) acid (H2SO4) unhydrolyzable (AUR) and the transfer of C from these fractions to SOM. Each biochemical fraction was Soxhlet-extracted from isotopically labeled (13C) leaves, twigs, bark and roots of eucalypt plants (120 days old). The molecular composition of each fraction was inferred from thermochemolysis with tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH), followed by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS). For the incubation, we collected soil samples from the topsoil (0–20 cm) of a sandy-clay loam, kaolinitic Haplic Ferralsol. Four plant organs and four biochemical fractions were arranged into a (4 × 4) + 1 factorial scheme, including one control treatment (soil only). The samples were incubated at 80% of their water-holding capacity and kept under controlled temperature (25 °C). The decomposition of the biochemical fractions was monitored by determining the CO2 concentration into the headspace of the vials at 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 13, 21, 28, 38, 46, 70, 80, 92, 112, 148, 178, and 200 days after the incubation had started. After the incubation, soil samples were submitted to density followed by particle-size fractionation. HWE and CF decomposed at faster rates than TSE and AUR throughout the incubation. The soil fraction < 53 μm retained a significantly higher proportion of the initial C input of HWE (32%) and AUR (31%) than TSE (19%) or CF (15%). Light fraction of organic matter (LFOM) with density < 1.8 g cm− 3, retained a significant proportion of AUR (37%) and TSE (32%) while CF was mostly lost as CO2 (79%). Selective preservation of organic materials (e.g., long-chain lipids) within the AUR and TSE fractions appears to be a significant pathway for the formation of SOM. SOM formation through a microbial-driven pathway cannot be ruled out for any biochemical fraction evaluated, but it seems more relevant for HWE and CF. In short-term, substrate biochemistry exerts a strong influence on the conversion of eucalypt litter fractions into either CO2 or SOM. Despite inherent challenges upfront, considering such dynamics at the ecosystem level will help to improve our current understanding on C storage and CO2 emissions from soils in long-term scales.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2018-09-27T00:57:52Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2018-09-27T00:57:52Z
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2018-02-15
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.004
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/22039
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 0016-7061
identifier_str_mv 0016-7061
url https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.004
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/22039
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartofseries.pt-BR.fl_str_mv Volume 312, Pages 121-129, February 2018
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Elsevier B. V.
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Elsevier B. V.
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Geoderma
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Geoderma
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
instname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
instacron:UFV
instname_str Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
instacron_str UFV
institution UFV
reponame_str LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
collection LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/1/artigo.pdf
https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/2/license.txt
https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/22039/3/artigo.pdf.jpg
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 3c38193e8e2c7d367621f9858c5d0534
8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33
50e04d02ff0138ae03c4a4318de4233c
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv fabiojreis@ufv.br
_version_ 1801212836214472704