| Literature DB >> 32358532 |
P S Keller1, N Catalán2,3, D von Schiller4, H-P Grossart5,6, M Koschorreck7, B Obrador4, M A Frassl7,8, N Karakaya9, N Barros10, J A Howitt11, C Mendoza-Lera12, A Pastor13, G Flaim14, R Aben15, T Riis13, M I Arce16, G Onandia17, J R Paranaíba10, A Linkhorst18, R Del Campo19,20, A M Amado10,21, S Cauvy-Fraunié12, S Brothers22, J Condon23, R F Mendonça10, F Reverey17, E-I Rõõm24, T Datry12, F Roland10, A Laas24, U Obertegger14, J-H Park25, H Wang26, S Kosten15, R Gómez20, C Feijoó27, A Elosegi28, M M Sánchez-Montoya20, C M Finlayson29,30, M Melita31, E S Oliveira Junior15,32, C C Muniz32, L Gómez-Gener33, C Leigh8,34,35,36, Q Zhang37, R Marcé2,3.
Abstract
Many inland waters exhibit complete or partial desiccation, or have vanished due to global change, exposing sediments to the atmosphere. Yet, data on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from these sediments are too scarce to upscale emissions for global estimates or to understand their fundamental drivers. Here, we present the results of a global survey covering 196 dry inland waters across diverse ecosystem types and climate zones. We show that their CO2 emissions share fundamental drivers and constitute a substantial fraction of the carbon cycled by inland waters. CO2 emissions were consistent across ecosystem types and climate zones, with local characteristics explaining much of the variability. Accounting for such emissions increases global estimates of carbon emissions from inland waters by 6% (~0.12 Pg C y-1). Our results indicate that emissions from dry inland waters represent a significant and likely increasing component of the inland waters carbon cycle.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32358532 PMCID: PMC7195363 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15929-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Fig. 1Global distribution of CO2 fluxes from dry inland waters.
Size of pink dots indicates magnitude of measured CO2 fluxes. Background colours indicate climate zones according to the Köppen–Geiger climate classification system[52]. Inset illustrates the spatial distribution within the most densely sampled area.
Fig. 2CO2 fluxes separated by climate zones and ecosystem types.
Box = 25th and 75th percentiles, whiskers = 1.5* inter-quartile range. Black line = median. Blue lines represent average estimates of CO2 emissions for inland waters as reported in the literature[11, 20, 21]. Colours refer to climate zones as defined in Fig. 1. Note that the y-axis is presented on a log10 scale to show a wide range of flux values. Letters indicate significant differences between ecosystem types (Kruskal–Wallis test and Dunn’s post hoc test, P < 0.05).
Fig. 3Response of CO2 fluxes to environmental variables.
Left, moisture against organic matter. Right, moisture against temperature. Original values of moisture (%), organic matter (%) and CO2 flux (mmol m−2 d−1) are shown in a log10-transformed and z-transformed scale. Original values of temperature (°C) are shown in a z-transformed scale. Relationships arise from the linear mixed-effects model analysis.
Fig. 4Resulting coefficients from the linear mixed-effects model.
Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval. Variables are shown in decreasing order of significance (analysis of variance, ***P < 0.001, *P < 0.05). Moisture, elevation and conductivity have been log10-transformed and all variables have been z-transformed prior to analysis. Colons indicate interaction between the respective variables.