Are Swedish forest soils sinks or sources for CO₂--model analyses based on forest inventory data

• Published in: Biogeochemistry Vol. 82; no. 3; pp. 217 - 227
• Main Authors: Ågren, Göran I, Hyvönen, Riitta, Nilsson, Torbjörn
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Heidelberg Dordrecht : Kluwer Academic Publishers 01.02.2007; Springer; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Agricultural soils; Agrology; Animal and plant ecology; Animal, plant and microbial ecology; Biological and medical sciences; Carbon; Carbon balance; Carbon modelling; Coniferous forests; Earth sciences; Earth, ocean, space; Exact sciences and technology; Forest ecosystems; Forest litter; Forest soils; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Soil organic carbon; Soil water; Soils; Surficial geology; Synecology; Terrestrial ecosystems; Trees; Scandinavia; Sweden; carbon dioxide; models; Carbon modelling; Europe; nitrogen; accuracy; trees; forests; Carbon balance; forest soils; ecosystems; soils; organic carbon
• DOI: 10.1007/s10533-006-9064-0
• ISSN: 0168-2563

Forests soils should be neither sinks nor sources of carbon in a long-term perspective. From a Swedish perspective the time since the last glaciation has probably not been long enough to reach a steady state, although changes are currently very slow. In a shorter perspective, climatic and management changes over the past 100 years have probably created imbalances between litter input to soils and organic carbon mineralisation. Using extant data on forest inventories, we applied models to analyse possible changes in the carbon stocks of Swedish forest soils. The models use tree stocks to provide estimates of tree litter production, which are fed to models of litter decomposition and from which carbon stocks are calculated. National soil carbon stocks were estimated to have increased by 3 Tg yr-¹ or 12-13 g m-² yr-¹ in the period 1926-2000 and this increase will continue because soil stocks are far from equilibrium with current litter inputs. The figure obtained is likely to be an underestimation because wet sites store more carbon than predicted here and the inhibitory effect of nitrogen deposition on soil carbon mineralisation was neglected. Knowledge about site history prior to the calculation period determines the accuracy of current soil carbon stocks estimates, although changes can be more accurately estimated.