Biogeochemical Investigation at Prairie Ridge, NC
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Amy Keyworth
Jovi Saquing
November 2006
Outline
• What we expect to see… and why?
• What we do see… and how come?
• What can we conclude?
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Soil Profile DescriptionLitter (undecomposed)
Organic layer, fermented
Organic layer, humified
Mineral layer with organic carbon and leached minerals
Mineral layer with precipitation of oxides/hydroxides and/or carbonUnaltered parent substrate
Source: Gleixner, G. 2005. Stable isotope composition of soil organic matter. In Stable isotopes and biosphere-atmosphere interactions. ed. Flanagan, L.B., E.J. Ehleringer and D.E. Patake.
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Organic CompoundsCellulose
Monosaccharide (e.g. glucose)
Source: Gleixner, G. 2005. Stable isotope composition of soil organic matter. In Stable isotopes and biosphere-atmosphere interactions. ed. Flanagan, L.B., E.J. Ehleringer and D.E. Patake.
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Intermediates
(e.g. acetic acid)
CO2
Amino acid
Ammonium
Nitrites/Nitrates
N2, N2O
Lignin monomers
ProteinLigninLipid
Alkanes
Humic Substances
Organic Compounds
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Cellulose
Lignin
Lignin Monomers
Alkanes
What we expect to see..
13C – increase with depth • C/N – decrease with depth• % C – decrease with depth• % N – increase/decrease with depth • Carboxylic and aromatic groups –
present in organic layers, increasing aromaticity with depth
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Carbon isotopic composition profiles. Undisturbed site Disturbed (agricultural) site (Fig 2 middle, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
What we expect to see - 13C
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Valley Lower Slope Upper Slope Ridge Top
Carbon concentration profiles. Undisturbed site Disturbed (agricultural) site “Kink” in the C(z) curve reflects root depth or productivity zone (Fig 2. Top, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
What we expect to see – [C]
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
What we expect to see – C/N
Source: C/N of soil organic matter from different depth intervals (Gleixner, 2005)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Why do we expect to see it ?
1. Suess effect
2. Soil carbon mixing
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
4. Kinetic fractionation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Why we expect to see it ?
1. Suess effect
2. Soil carbon mixing
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
4. Kinetic fractionation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
1. Suess effect
– Older, deeper SOM originated when atmospheric 13C was more positive (CO2 was heavier)
– From 1744 to 1993, difference in 13C app -1.3 ‰
– Typical soil profile differences = 3 ‰
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
1. Suess effect
Mixing of SOC derived from the modern atmosphere versus that derived from a pre-Industrial Revolution
atmosphere. (Fig. 1A, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Why we expect to see it ?
1. Suess effect
2. Soil carbon mixing
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
4. Kinetic fractionation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
2. Soil carbon mixing
Mixing of leaf litter-derived SOC and root-derived SOC. (Fig. 1B, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
a. Surface litter (depleted) vs. root derived (enriched) SOM
2. Soil carbon mixing
Mixing of SOC formed under two different vegetation communities, e.g. C3 vs C4. Slope could vary from positive to negative depending
on direction of shift. (Fig. 1C, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
b. Variable biomass inputs (C3 vs. C4 plants)
2. Soil carbon mixing
c. Some of the carbon incorporated into SOM by these critters has an atmospheric or soil gas, not SOM, source.
d. Atmospheric C is heavier. Atmospheric CO2 in the soil is 4.4 ‰ heavier than CO2 metabolized by decomposition (Wedin, 1995)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Why we expect to see it ?
1. Suess effect
2. Soil carbon mixing
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
4. Kinetic fractionation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
– Lipids, lignin, cellulose - 13C depleted with respect to whole plant
– Sugars, amino acids, hemi-cellulose, pectin - 13C enriched
– Lipids and lignin are preferentially accumulated in early decomposition
– Works against soil depth enrichment
– More C than N are lost from soil as SOM decomposes due to internal recycling of N.
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Why we expect to see it ?
1. Suess effect
2. Soil carbon mixing
3. Preferential microbial decomposition
4. Kinetic fractionation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
4. Kinetic fractionation
– Microbes choose lighter C
– Microbial respiration of CO2 – 12C preferentially respired
– Frequently use Rayleigh distillation analyses (Wynn 2006)
– No direct evidence for this (Ehleringer 2000)
– Preferential preservation of 13C enriched decomposition products of microbial transformation
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
4. Kinetic fractionation
13C distillation during decomposing SOM. The gray lines show the model with varying fractionation factors from 0.997
to 0.999. (Fig. 1D, J.G. Wynn, et al., 2006)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
4. Kinetic fractionation
Assumptions by Wynn etal• Open system
– All components decompose– Contribute to soil-respired CO2 at same rate with depth
• FSOC fSOC
11111
1
1100013
1100013
tteteCi
Cf
F
• F fraction of remaining soil organic matter (SOC) – approximated by the calculated value of fSOC
13Cf isotopic composition of SOC when sampled 13Ci isotopic composition of input from biomass• α fractionation factor between SOC and respired CO2 • e efficiency of microbial assimilation• t fraction of assimilated carbon retained by a stabilized pool of SOM
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Rayleigh distillation
Anthropogenic mixing (agriculture)
A – natural
B – introduce C4 plants, enriched in 13C
C – Cropping – removes new, low 13C material, leading to surface enrichment
D – Erosion – removes upper layer, moving the whole curve up
E – Reintroduce soil organic carbon (better management practices) – reverses the trends in B, C, and D
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Various reasons that disturbed land might not conform to nice regression curve in Fig 1D (Wynn fig 9 )
What we do see - results
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
δ13C % C % N C:N
Mean Mole
O- horizon PRS-5 Bulk -19.6 4.2 0.4 13.5
O- horizon PRS-7 Bulk -19.8 4.0 0.4 12.7
O- horizon PRS-15 Bulk -19.1 1.5 0.1 14.4
A- horizon (0-6 cm) PRS-16 Bulk -19.0 2.0 0.2 13.4
AP horizon (6-11 cm) PRS-17 Bulk -15.9 0.8 0.1 17.3
B horizon (11+ cm) PRS-18 Bulk -22.8 0.7 0.1 16.0
O- horizon PRS-15 Plant Fragment -21.3 36.8 1.4 31.4
A- horizon (0-6 cm) PRS-16 Plant Fragment -29.6 39.1 1.9 23.7
AP horizon (6-11 cm) PRS-17 Plant Fragment -27.0 18.7 0.6 34.1
B horizon (11+ cm) PRS-18 Plant Fragment
O- horizon PRS-15 Heavy Fraction -19.0 1.5 0.1 15.4
A- horizon (0-6 cm) PRS-16 Heavy Fraction -18.7 1.2 0.1 14.7
AP horizon (6-11 cm) PRS-17 Heavy Fraction -15.6 0.7 0.0 17.7
B horizon (11+ cm) PRS-18 Heavy Fraction
What we do see - results
13C – increase 3‰ from surface to 8 cm
• C/N – increases to 8 cm, then decreases
• % C – decrease with depth
• % N – decrease with depth
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
What we do see - 13C
Increase of 3‰ from surface to 8 cm (PRS 18 = anomaly)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Depth vs δ13C
0
5
10
15
20
-26 -24 -22 -20 -18 -16 -14
δ13C
Dep
th (c
m)
What we do see – C/N
Increase of from surface to 8 cm then decreases
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Depth vs C/N
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
C/N
Dep
th (c
m)
What we do see – C%
Decrease with depth
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Depth vs %C
0
5
10
15
20
0 1 2 3 4 5
%C
Dep
th (c
m)
What we do see – N%
Decrease with depth
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Depth vs %N
0
5
10
15
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
%N
Dep
th (c
m)
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
• PRS 7 and PRS 15, both surface soils, have similar absorbencies• All soils have peak at wavelength 1032• All 5 spectra have similar peaks, though not necessarily similar absorbencies• In our bulk and heavy samples, are the mineral spectra masking the organics, as in Poirier’s M-SOM?
Soil FTIR - Normalized
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
05001000150020002500300035004000
Wavelength (cm-1)
Ab
so
rban
ce
15 16 17 18 7
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Soil FTIR - Normalized
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
05001000150020002500300035004000
Wavelength (cm-1)
Ab
sorb
ance
15 16 17 18 7
Aliphatic C-H
O-H
C=C,C=O, N-H
Si-O
Wavenumber Description Possible functional groups Comments
cm-1
3700 sharp peak O-H stretching region (3800-3400 for clay mineral)
3622 sharp peak O-H stretching region (3800-3400 for clay mineral) Bands due to Si-O-O-OH vibration.
3464 broad, strong intensity O-H , N-H Since it's broad and strong intensity, this is due to O-H bond rather than N-H bond.
2935 tiny broad C-H (3150-2850) The peak is below 3000, so it is an aliphatic C-H vibration. Medium intensity absortions at 1450 and 1375 cm-1 will indicate -CH3 bend. strectching.
1655 medium intensity C=C (1680-1600 for aromatic and alkenes); C=O vibrations (1680-1630 for amide), C=N (1690-1630) and also of N-H bend (1650-1475)
Some soil literature assigned this to C=O vibratios of carboxylates and aromatic. Vibrations involving most polar bonds, such as C=O and O-H have the most intense IR absorptions. This peak has medium intensity and most likely due to N-H bending.
1450 & 1400 weak C-H, alkanes, -CH3 (bend, 1450 and 1375), -CH2 (bend, at
1465),
Most likely CH3 bending.
1099-1034 sharp & strongest peak Si-O vibration of clay minerals Consistent with FTIR spectra of soil in the literarture
800 medium intensity, saw tooth NH2 wagging and twisting, =C-H bend, alkenes Intense absorption at 460-475 corresponds to SiO3
-2 vibration. In
the literarture, bands at 800,780,650,590,530 and 470 are attributed to inorganic materials, such as clay and quartz minerals.
696 medium intensity, sharp
540 medium intensity, sharp N-C=O bend for secondary amides
472 strong intensity, sharp C-C=O bend for secondary amides, SiO3-2
Problems with Methods• Haphazard protocol on soil sampling at the
site (i.e. depth interval, mass of soil)
• Inconsistent sample preparation procedure (i.e. different mass, subjective sorting)
• Poor implementation of IRMS protocols (i.e. sample size, standard calibration)
• Insufficient samples for statistical accuracy
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Conclusions 13C – increase 3‰ to 8 cm as expected
• C/N – decreases in lower portion of profile as expected
• % C – decrease with depth as expected
• % N – decrease with depth
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
Conclusions
• Don’t have enough samples or rigorous sampling method– Many studies examine only the organic layer
– 5 cm only
• Minerals swamp the organics in our FTIR results– Look at methods to extract organics
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
References• Antil, R.J., Gerzabek, M.H., Haberhauer, G. and Eder, G. 2005. Long-term
effects of cropped vs. fallow and fertilizer amendments on soil organic matter I. Organic carbon. J.Plant Nutr.Soil Sci., 168, 108-116.
• Ehleringer, James R., Buchmann, N., Flanagan, L.B., 2000 Carbon Isotope Ratios in Belowground Carbon Cycle Processes, Ecological Applications, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 412-422
• Gerzabek, M.H., Antil, R.S., Kogel-Knabner, I., Knicker, H., Kirchmann, H., and G. Haberhauer. 2006. How are soil use and management reflected by soil organic matter characteristics: a spectroscopic approach. European Journal of Soil Science, 57, 485-494.
• Gleixner, G. 2005. Stable isotope composition of soil organic matter. In Stable isotopes and biosphere-atmosphere interactions. ed. Flanagan, L.B., E.J. Ehleringer and D.E. Patake.
• Haberhauer, G., Rafferty, B., Strebl, F. and Gerzabek, M.H. 1998. Comparison of the composition of forest soil litter derived from three different sites at various decompositional stages using FTIR spectroscopy. Geoderma 83, 331-342.
• Johnson, M.D., Huang, W. and Weber Jr., W.J. 2001. A distributed reactivity model for sorption by soils and sediments. 13. Simulated diagenesis of natural sediment organic matter and its impact on sorption/desorption equilibria. Environ. Sci. Technol. 35, 1680-1687.
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile
References
• Melillo, Jerry M., Aber, J.D., Linkins, A.E., Ricca, A., Fry, B., Nadelhoffer, K.J., 1989, Carbon and nitrogen dynamics along the decay continuum: Plant litter to soil organic matter, Plant and Soil, vol. 115, p. 189-198
• Poirier, N., Sohi, S.P., Gaunt, J.L., Mahieu, N., Randall, E.W., Powlson, D.S., Evershed, R.P., 2005, The chemical composition of measurable soil organic matter pools, Organic Geochemistry, vol. 36, p. 1174-1189
• Still, C.J., Berry, J.A., Ribas-Carbo, M. and Helliker, B.R. 2003, The contribution of C3 and C4 plants to the carbon cycle of a tallgrass prairie: an isotopic approach. Ocecologia 136:347-359.
• Wedin, David A., Tieszen, L.L., Dewey, B., Pastor, J., 1995, Carbon Isotope Dynamics During Grass Decomposition and Soil Organic Matter Formation, Ecology, vol. 76, no. 5, p. 1383-1392
• Wynn, J.G., Harden, J.W., Fries, T.L., 2006, Stable carbon isotope depth profiles and soil organic carbon dynamics in the lower Mississippi Basin, Geoderma, vol. 131, p. 89-109
Prairie Ridge Soil Profile