草地群落多样性和生态系统碳氮循环对氮输入的非线性响应及其机制

理解草地生态系统结构和功能对氮富集的响应及其机制有助于准确评估大气氮沉降等外源氮输入的生态效应。全球范围内建立的多水平氮添加实验为认识草地生态系统结构和功能对氮输入的非线性响应机制提供了有效途径。为了反映学术界基于多水平氮添加控制实验取得的主要研究进展,该文综述了草地群落多样性和生态系统碳氮循环过程对外源氮输入的非线性响应特征及其驱动机制。按照目前的研究,氮输入会导致草地植物物种多样性、功能多样性以及土壤细菌多样性下降,但真菌多样性的变化并不明显。地上和地下生产力对氮输入的响应趋势存在差异:地上生产力沿氮添加梯度呈“先上升后饱和”的变化规律,而根系生产量和根冠比呈下降趋势,根系周转速率则呈“先上升后下降”的单峰格局。不同碳分解过程对氮输入的响应也不尽相同:凋落物分解速率沿氮添加梯度表现出“指数衰减、线性增加或无显著变化”的多元响应,而土壤呼吸和CH₄吸收速率与施氮量的关系则以“低氮促进、高氮抑制”的单峰趋势为主。类似地,不同土壤碳组分对氮输入的响应存在差异:氮添加总体会导致草地土壤碳库和颗粒态有机碳含量增加,而矿物结合态碳含量随施氮量呈“增加、不变或下降”的多元响...     

基于生命周期评价的上海市水稻生产的碳足迹

碳足迹是指由企业、组织或个人引起的碳排放的集合。参照PAS2050规范并结合生命周期评价方法对上海市水稻生产进行了碳足迹评估。结果表明:(1)目前上海市水稻生产的碳排放为11.8114 t CO2e/hm2,折合每吨水稻生产周期的碳足迹为1.2321 t CO2e;(2)稻田温室气体排放是水稻生产最主要的碳排放源,每吨水稻生产的总排放量为0.9507 t CO2e,占水稻生产全部碳排放的77.1%,其中甲烷(CH4)又是最主要的温室气体,对稻田温室气体碳排放的贡献率高达96.6%;(3)化学肥料的施用是第二大碳排放源,每吨水稻生产的总排放量为0.2044 t CO2e,占水稻生产总碳排放的16.5%,其中N最高,排放量为0.1159 t CO2e。因此,上海低碳水稻生产的关键在降低稻田甲烷的排放,另外可通过提高氮肥利用效率,减少氮肥施用等方法减少种植过程中碳排放。     

凋落物去除和添加处理对典型草原生态系统碳通量的影响

为揭示凋落物去除和添加处理对草原生态系统碳通量的影响, 2013和2014年连续两年在成熟群落围封样地进行凋落物去除实验、在退化群落放牧样地进行凋落物添加实验, 并运用静态箱法探讨碳通量变化规律并分析其主要影响因子。结果表明: 两种群落的净生态系统CO₂交换(NEE)有明显的季节性变化。对成熟群落而言, 去除50%凋落物显著增加了NEE, 去除100%凋落物显著降低了NEE, 而对生态系统总初级生产力(GEP)和生态系统呼吸(ER)均无显著影响; 对退化群落而言, 凋落物添加显著增加了GEP和NEE, 而对ER无显著影响。两种群落的GEP与10 cm土壤温度显著正相关, 但NEE和GEP的变化规律与土壤温度相反, 与10 cm土壤湿度相同。由此可见, 凋落物去除和添加处理对生态系统碳通量的影响主要是改变土壤湿度和地上生物量,而不是改变土壤温度。该研究为合理利用凋落物改善草地生态系统管理和促进草地恢复提供了理论依据。     

LIFE BEEF CARBON: a common framework for quantifying grass and corn based beef farms’ carbon footprints

Europe’s roadmap to a low-carbon economy aims to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Beef production is an important source of GHG emissions and is expected to increase as the world population grows. LIFE BEEF CARBON is a voluntary European initiative that aims to reduce GHG emissions per unit of beef (carbon footprint) by 15% over a 10-year period on 2172 farms in four large beef-producing countries. Changes in farms beef carbon footprint are normally estimated via simulation modelling, but the methods current models apply differ. Thus, our initial goal was to develop a common modelling framework to estimate beef farms carbon footprint. The framework was developed for a diverse set of Western Europe farms located in Ireland, Spain, Italy and France. Whole farm and life cycle assessment (LCA) models were selected to quantify emissions for the different production contexts and harmonized. Carbon Audit was chosen for Ireland, Bovid-CO₂ for Spain and CAP’2ER for France and Italy. All models were tested using 20 case study farms, that is, 5 per country and quantified GHG emissions associated with on-farm live weight gain. The comparison showed the ranking of beef systems gross carbon footprint was consistent across the three models. Suckler to weaning or store systems generally had the highest carbon footprint followed by suckler to beef systems and fattening beef systems. When applied to the same farm, Carbon Audit’s footprint estimates were slightly lower than CAP’2ER, but marginally higher than Bovid-CO₂. These differences occurred because the models were adapted to a specific region’s production circumstances, which meant their emission factors for key sources; that is, methane from enteric fermentation and GHG emissions from concentrates were less accurate when used outside their target region. Thus, for the common modelling framework, region-specific LCA models were chosen to estimate beef carbon footprints instead of a single generic model. Additionally, the Carbon Audit and Bovid-CO₂ models were updated to include carbon removal by soil and other environmental metrics included in CAP’2ER, for example, acidification. This allows all models to assess the effect carbon mitigation strategies have on other potential pollutants. Several options were identified to reduce beef farms carbon footprint, for example, improving genetic merit. These options were assessed for beef systems, and a mitigation plan was created by each nation. The cumulative mitigation effect of the LIFE BEEF CARBON plan was estimated to exceed the projects reduction target (−15%).     

UV-B辐射增强对陆地生态系统碳循环的影响

作为全球变化的重要现象之一,紫外射线B(UV-B,波长280～320 nm)辐射增强对陆地生态系统碳循环具有重要影响.UV-B辐射增强主要通过改变植物的光合作用、凋落物分解以及土壤呼吸来影响陆地生态系统碳的输入和转化输出.其他气候因子(大气CO2浓度、温度和水分)可能会促进或减缓UV-B辐射对陆地生态系统碳循环的作用.本文介绍了UV-B辐射增强的背景,综述了国内外近年来UV-B辐射增强及与其他气候因子交互作用对陆地生态系统碳循环的影响,总结了目前研究存在的不足,讨论了未来的研究重点和方向.     

Sources of variability in greenhouse gas and energy balances for biofuel production: a systematic review

Across the energy sector, alternatives to fossil fuels are being developed, in response to the dual drivers of climate change and energy security. For transport, biofuels have the greatest potential to replace fossil fuels in the short‐to medium term. However, the ecological benefits of biofuels and the role that their deployment can play in mitigating climate change are being called into question. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a widely used approach that enables the energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) balance of biofuel production to be calculated. Concerns have nevertheless been raised that published data show widely varying and sometimes contradictory results. This review describes a systematic review of GHG emissions and energy balance data from 44 LCA studies of first‐ and second‐generation biofuels. The information collated was used to identify the dominant sources of GHG emissions and energy requirements in biofuel production and the key sources of variability in published LCA data. Our analysis revealed three distinct sources of variation: (1) ‘real’ variability in parameters e.g. cultivation; (2) ‘methodological’ variability due to the implementation of the LCA method; and (3) ‘uncertainty’ due to parameters rarely included and poorly quantified. There is global interest in developing a sustainability assessment protocol for biofuels. Confidence in the results of such an assessment can only be assured if these areas of uncertainty and variability are addressed. A more defined methodology is necessary in order to allow effective and accurate comparison of results. It is also essential that areas of uncertainty such as impacts on soil carbon stocks and fluxes are included in LCA assessments, and that further research is conducted to enable a robust calculation of impacts under different land‐use change scenarios. Without the inclusion of these parameters, we cannot be certain that biofuels are really delivering GHG savings compared with fossil fuels.     

Life cycle assessment of biofuels from Jatropha curcas in West Africa: a field study

In recent years, liquid biofuels for transport have benefited from significant political support due to their potential role in curbing climate change and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. They may also participate to rural development by providing new markets for agricultural production. However, the growth of energy crops has raised concerns due to their high consumption of conventional fuels, fertilizers and pesticides, their impacts on ecosystems and their competition for arable land with food crops. Low-input species such as Jatropha curcas , a perennial, inedible crop well adapted to semiarid regions, has received much interest as a new alternative for biofuel production, minimizing adverse effects on the environment and food supply. Here, we used life-cycle assessment to quantify the benefits of J. curcas biofuel production in West Africa in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and fossil energy use, compared with fossil diesel fuel and other biofuels. Biodiesel from J. curcas has a much higher performance than current biofuels, relative to oil-derived diesel fuels. Under West Africa conditions, J. curcas biodiesel allows a 72% saving in greenhouse gas emissions compared with conventional diesel fuel, and its energy yield (the ratio of biodiesel energy output to fossil energy input) is 4.7. J. curcas production studied is eco-compatible for the impacts under consideration and fits into the context of sustainable development.