Literature DB >> 21825150

Transformations, transport, and potential unintended consequences of high sulfur inputs to Napa Valley vineyards.

Eve-Lyn S Hinckley1, Pamela A Matson.   

Abstract

Unintended anthropogenic deposition of sulfur (S) to forest ecosystems has a range of negative consequences, identified through decades of research. There has been far less study of purposeful S use in agricultural systems around the world, including the application of elemental sulfur (S(0)) as a quick-reacting fungicide to prevent damage to crops. Here we report results from a three-year study of the transformations and flows of applied S(0) in soils, vegetation, and hydrologic export pathways of Napa Valley, CA vineyards, documenting that all applied S is lost from the vineyard ecosystem on an annual basis. We found that S(0) oxidizes rapidly to sulfate ( ) on the soil surface where it then accumulates over the course of the growing season. Leaf and grape tissues accounted for only 7-13% of applied S whereas dormant season cover crops accounted for 4-10% of applications. Soil S inventories were largely and ester-bonded sulfates; they decreased from 1,623 ± 354 kg ha(-1) during the dry growing season to 981 ± 526 kg ha(-1) (0-0.5 m) during the dormant wet season. Nearly all S applied to the vineyard soils is transported offsite in dissolved oxidized forms during dormant season rainstorms. Thus, the residence time of reactive S is brief in these systems, and largely driven by hydrology. Our results provide new insight into how S use in vineyards constitutes a substantial perturbation of the S cycle in Northern California winegrowing regions and points to the unintended consequences that agricultural S use may have at larger scales.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21825150      PMCID: PMC3161611          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1110741108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  5 in total

1.  Tracing sources of sulfur in the Florida Everglades.

Authors:  Anne L Bates; William H Orem; Judson W Harvey; Elliott C Spiker
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.751

2.  Effects of acidic deposition on forest and aquatic ecosystems in New York State.

Authors:  Charles T Driscoll; Kimberley M Driscoll; Myron J Mitchell; Dudley J Raynal
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 8.071

3.  Carbon sequestration in California agriculture, 1980-2000.

Authors:  David A Kroodsma; Christopher B Field
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.657

4.  Aerobic sulfate reduction in microbial mats.

Authors:  D E Canfield; D J Des Marais
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-03-22       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Pyrite: its rapid formation in a salt marsh and its importance in ecosystem metabolism.

Authors:  R W Howarth
Journal:  Science       Date:  1979-01-05       Impact factor: 47.728

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  Metabolic responses to sulfur dioxide in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.): photosynthetic tissues and berries.

Authors:  Michael J Considine; Christine H Foyer
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 5.753

2.  Adaptive genomic structural variation in the grape powdery mildew pathogen, Erysiphe necator.

Authors:  Laura Jones; Summaira Riaz; Abraham Morales-Cruz; Katherine C H Amrine; Brianna McGuire; W Douglas Gubler; M Andrew Walker; Dario Cantu
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.969

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.