Warming accelerates decomposition of decades-old carbon in forest soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global climate carbon-cycle models predict acceleration of soil organic carbon losses to the atmosphere with warming, but the size of this feedback is poorly known. The temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition is commonly determined by measuring changes in the rate of carbon dioxide (CO(2)) production under controlled laboratory conditions. We added measurements of carbon isotopes in respired CO(2) to constrain the age of carbon substrates contributing to the temperature response of decomposition for surface soils from two temperate forest sites with very different overall rates of carbon cycling. Roughly one-third of the carbon respired at any temperature was fixed from the atmosphere more than 10 y ago, and the mean age of respired carbon reflected a mixture of substrates of varying ages. Consistent with global ecosystem model predictions, the temperature sensitivity of the carbon fixed more than a decade ago was the same as the temperature sensitivity for carbon fixed less than 10 y ago. However, we also observed an overall increase in the mean age of carbon respired at higher temperatures, even correcting for potential substrate limitation effects. The combination of several age constraints from carbon isotopes showed that warming had a similar effect on respiration of decades-old and younger (<10 y) carbon but a greater effect on decomposition of substrates of intermediate (between 7 and 13 y) age. Our results highlight the vulnerability of soil carbon to warming that is years-to-decades old, which makes up a large fraction of total soil carbon in forest soils globally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".