DOCSLIB.ORG

Influences of Modern Pedogenesis on Paleoclimate Estimates from Pennsylvanian And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Influences of Modern Pedogenesis on Paleoclimate Estimates from Pennsylvanian and Permian Paleosols, Southeast Ohio A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Sarah J. Kogler May 2018 © 2018 Sarah J. Kogler. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Influences of Modern Pedogenesis on Paleoclimate Estimates from Pennsylvanian and Permian Paleosols, Southeast Ohio by SARAH J. KOGLER has been approved for the Department of Geological Sciences and the College of Arts and Sciences by Daniel I. Hembree Associate Professor of Geological Sciences Robert Frank Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT KOGLER, SARAH J., M.S., May 2018, Geological Sciences Influences of Modern Pedogenesis on Paleoclimate Estimates from Pennsylvanian and Permian Paleosols, Southeast Ohio Director of Thesis: Daniel I. Hembree Exposed paleosols are subject to modern pedogenic processes which, over time, are expected to alter paleosol chemistry and subsequent paleoclimate estimates to better reflect the environment at the time of exposure rather than the time of formation. Although paleosols are widely used in paleoclimatic reconstruction, current research typically does not address the degree of influence that modern weathering has on the bulk geochemistry of paleosols. Previously described Pennsylvanian and Permian paleoVertisols and paleoInceptisols with known durations of exposure were described and sampled from five roadcuts in southeastern, Ohio. Samples were collected at depths of 0, 25, 50, 100, and 150 cm from the outcrop surface, and then analyzed via XRF for major oxides (Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Na, Al, Si, Mn, P, and Ti). These data were used in molecular weathering ratios to characterize paleosol properties and calculate MAP and MAT. Results indicate that although oxide geochemistry often differs between sampling depths, the differences do not occur in a pattern that supports that recent pedogenesis is a driving factor. Rather, this study may be capturing naturally occurring geochemical variations that are the result of small-scale differences in formational environment. Additionally, decade- level exposure time along these roadcuts may limit the extent of pedogenesis. Ultimately, for geochemical studies on paleosols in outcrops located on young roadcuts in 4 temperate climates, current sampling techniques seem to be sufficient in mitigating the effects modern weathering. Recommendations from this study include sampling from 25- 50cm beyond paleosol surface and taking multiple samples across an outcrop to account for lateral variation. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I need to thank my adviser, Daniel Hembree, for forcing me to consistently meet his expectations and live up to my potential through a combination of encouragement, patience, and pressure. I would like to thank my committee members, Gregory Springer, Alycia Stigall, and Craig Grimes, for providing a secondary source of guidance and expertise. Many thanks to my field assistants, Alexander Hartman and Kelsey McGuire, who were willing to dig holes for money, and Emma Swaninger, who was willing to dig holes for free. Without you I would probably still be on a roadcut. I would like to thank Rob Michitsch at the University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point, if we never met, this thesis would probably have been about deer. Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family for their unwavering support, particularly my fiancé, Bradley Kuehn, who sacrificed both his career and his computer to further my education. I would also like to thank the following funding sources that made this project possible: the Geological Society of America, student research grant, the Society of Sedimentary Geology, Foundation Grant, the Ohio University Geological Sciences Alumni Graduate Research Grant, and the American Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund (grant 52708-UR8). 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgments............................................................................................................... 5 List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 6 List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2: Paleosols and Paleoclimate ............................................................................. 12 Impacts of Climate on Pedogenesis ............................................................................ 12 Use of Climofunctions in Interpreting Soil Properties ............................................... 14 Types of Evaluated Paleosols ..................................................................................... 19 paleoVertisols ....................................................................................................... 19 paleoInceptisols..................................................................................................... 20 Chapter 3: Geologic Setting .............................................................................................. 22 Pennsylvanian ............................................................................................................. 22 Conemaugh Group ................................................................................................ 22 Monongahela Group ............................................................................................. 28 Permian ....................................................................................................................... 29 Dunkard Group ..................................................................................................... 30 Modern Soil-Forming Conditions ............................................................................... 32 Chapter 4: Methods ........................................................................................................... 36 Field Methods ............................................................................................................. 36 Laboratory Methods .................................................................................................... 39 Analyses and Comparisons ......................................................................................... 40 Chapter 5: Results ............................................................................................................. 42 Physical Properties by Site.......................................................................................... 42 Site 1 ..................................................................................................................... 42 Site 2 ..................................................................................................................... 47 Site 3 ..................................................................................................................... 50 Site 4 ..................................................................................................................... 55 Site 5 ..................................................................................................................... 61 Geochemical Properties by Site ............................................................................ 66 7 Site 1 ..................................................................................................................... 66 Site 2 ..................................................................................................................... 68 Site 3 ..................................................................................................................... 70 Site 4 ..................................................................................................................... 72 Site 5 ..................................................................................................................... 75 Comparisons ............................................................................................................... 78 Overall................................................................................................................... 78 Upper v. Lower ..................................................................................................... 78 Lithified v. Unconsolidated .................................................................................. 79 PaleoVertisols v. PaleoInceptisols ........................................................................ 79 Chapter 6: Discussion ....................................................................................................... 88 Sampling Depth and Bulk Geochemistry ................................................................... 88 Causes of Observed Geochemical Variation .............................................................. 89 Local Variation in Soil Properties......................................................................... 89 Deep Weathering Profile....................................................................................... 93 Outcrop Age .........................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Soil Properties and Pre-Columbian Settlement Patterns in The

    Soil Properties and Pre-Columbian Settlement Patterns in The

    SOIL, 1, 65–81, 2015 www.soil-journal.net/1/65/2015/ doi:10.5194/soil-1-65-2015 SOIL © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Soil properties and pre-Columbian settlement patterns in the Monumental Mounds Region of the Llanos de Moxos, Bolivian Amazon U. Lombardo1,2, S. Denier1, and H. Veit1 1Universität Bern, Geographisches Institut, Hallerstrasse 12, 3012 Bern, Switzerland 2CaSeS research group, IMF-CSIC, C/Egipciaques, 15-08001 Barcelona, Spain Correspondence to: U. Lombardo ([email protected]) Received: 5 May 2014 – Published in SOIL Discuss.: 15 May 2014 Revised: – – Accepted: 26 September 2014 – Published: 6 January 2015 Abstract. In the present paper we explore to what degree soil properties might have influenced pre-Columbian settlement patterns in the Monumental Mounds Region (MMR) of the Llanos de Moxos (LM), Bolivian Amazon. Monumental mounds are pre-Hispanic earth buildings and were preferentially built on mid- to late Holocene palaeolevees of the Grande River (here denominated PR1), while levees of older palaeorivers (PR0) were only sparsely occupied. We dug two transects across PR0 and PR1 levee–backswamp catenas and analysed them for grain size, pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC) and Corg. Our data show that PR1 soils, where the density of mounds is higher, have far greater agricultural potential than PR0 soils, which are affected by aluminium toxicity in the backswamps and by high levels of exchangeable sodium in the levees. This study provides new data on the soil properties of the south-eastern Bolivian Amazon and reinforces the hypothesis that environmental constraints and opportunities exerted an important role on pre-Columbian occupation patterns and the population density reached in the Bolivian Amazon.
  • Distribution of Nematodes in Vertisol Aggregates Under a Permanent Pasture in Martinique

    Distribution of Nematodes in Vertisol Aggregates Under a Permanent Pasture in Martinique

    Applied Soil Ecology ELSEVIER Applied Soil Ecology 4 (1996) 193-200 Distribution of nematodes in vertisol aggregates under a permanent pasture in Martinique Patrick Quénéhervé, Jean-Luc Chotte * Laboratoire de Nhnatologie et Laboratoire de Matière Organique des Sols Tropicaux, Centre ORSTOM, B.P. 8006,97259 Fort de France Cedex, Martinique Accepted 13 May 1996 Abstract This study reports on the distribution of nematodes in different soil habitats under a permanent pasture of digitgrass (Digitaria decuinbens Stent. cv. 'Pangola') in Martinique. The objectives were (i) to evaluate a gentle fractionation method compatible with further soil nematode extraction and (ii) to assess the respective soil microhabitats of plant-feeding nematodes and free-living nematodes. This study indicated that gentle soil fractionation can effectively separate soil habitats and allow the recovery of associated nematodes. Plant-feeding nematodes were equally distributed between inter-aggregate pores, habitats constituted of aggregated fine silt + clay particles and roots + rhizosphere. Most of free-living nematodes (53%) resided in inter-aggre- gate pores. Irrespective of the food resource, densities of nematodes (number per gram of habitat) were similar in habitats coarser than 1000 pm (A5000, A2000, and A1000). Habitats with the finest soil (A200) were not favourable sites because of the rarity of roots (for plant-feeding nematodes) and physical constraints. Keywords: Nematode; Pasture; Soil aggregates; Soil fractionation; Soil habitats; Soil porosity; Vertisol 1. Introduction indicated that carbon concentration controls the dis- tribution of soil microorganisms. Griffin (1981) Soils consist of an assemblage of solid particles demonstrated the importance of water suction in and air-filled or water-filled pores of different sizes microbial metabolism.
  • Soils Section

    Soils Section

    Soils Section 2003 Florida Envirothon Study Sections Soil Key Points SOIL KEY POINTS • Recognize soil as an important dynamic resource. • Describe basic soil properties and soil formation factors. • Understand soil drainage classes and know how wetlands are defined. • Determine basic soil properties and limitations, such as mottling and permeability by observing a soil pit or soil profile. • Identify types of soil erosion and discuss methods for reducing erosion. • Use soil information, including a soil survey, in land use planning discussions. • Discuss how soil is a factor in, or is impacted by, nonpoint and point source pollution. Florida’s State Soil Florida has the largest total acreage of sandy, siliceous, hyperthermic Aeric Haplaquods in the nation. This is commonly called Myakka fine sand. It does not occur anywhere else in the United States. There are more than 1.5 million acres of Myakka fine sand in Florida. On May 22, 1989, Governor Bob Martinez signed Senate Bill 525 into law making Myakka fine sand Florida’s official state soil. iii Florida Envirothon Study Packet — Soils Section iv Contents CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................1 WHAT IS SOIL AND HOW IS SOIL FORMED? .....................................................................3 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS..........................................................................................................7 Texture......................................................................................................................................7
  • Integrated Management of Vertisols for Crop Production in Ethiopia: a Review

    Integrated Management of Vertisols for Crop Production in Ethiopia: a Review

    Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-3208 (Paper) ISSN 2225-093X (Online) Vol.6, No.24, 2016 Integrated Management of Vertisols for Crop Production in Ethiopia: A Review Tadesse Debele 1 Haile Deressa 2 1.Department of Plant Sciences, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, Ambo University, P.O.Box – 19, Ambo, Ethiopia 2.Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, P.O.Box 100009, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Abstract In Ethiopia, Vertisols account for 12.6 million hectares, of which about 7.6 million ha found in the highlands and are generally waterlogged due to abundant rainfall during the growing period. These soils are generally hard when dry and sticky when wet, a very low infiltration rate when the surface is sealed, very low saturated hydraulic conductivity and compaction as a result of swelling, and therefore presents serious limitations to their use. Crop production on these soils is limited because of impeded drainage, difficulty of land preparation, soil erosion and low fertility. Long-term adaptations to climate changes on Vertisols management require structural changes to overcome the harsh conditions. Vertisols have considerable productive potential, but they are usually underutilized in the traditional production system. Hence, achieving sustainable and improved management of Vertisols has been a major challenge for Ethiopian farmers for many years. Vertisols management technologies essentially early planting, drainage using BBM, improved variety, and fertilizers application were developed to effectively and efficiently utilize these soils. Early planting of short maturing wheat and teff varieties opened an opportunity for double cropping; excess water drained from the furrows would be utilized for supplemental irrigation.
  • Assessing Drought Regions and Vulnerability Through Soil Climate Regimes

    Assessing Drought Regions and Vulnerability Through Soil Climate Regimes

    Assessing Drought Regions and Vulnerability Through Soil Climate Regimes William J. Waltman University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915., Stephen Goddard, Gang Gu, Stephen E. Reichenbach, Mark D. Svoboda, and Jeffrey S. Peake. Abstract The agricultural landscapes of the Great Plains reflect a complex pattern of soil climate regimes (Soil Taxonomy, Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and inherent variability that influence the cropping systems and behavior of farmers. The historical crop yields and acreage harvested of crops were compared with climatic events through time to describe the trends and adaptations of farmers and changes in agroecology. The USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service and Risk Management Agency's county-level databases were coupled with soil climate regimes derived from the Enhanced Newhall Simulation Model to explain spatial relationships of crop yields and identifying growing environments favorable to corn, soybeans, sorghum, and wheat. In addition, these geospatial databases can be used to characterize shifts in growing environments through time and space. Comparisons were generated at the county level between irrigated and nonirrigated yields, yield ratios (corn:soybean) to identify favored environments, shifts in crop acreages reflecting past climatic events and changes in genetics, and dominant "cause-of-loss" processes for specific crops. The Enhanced Newhall Simulation Model was used to derive probabilities of soil climate regimes and differentiate agroecological zones. This study also addresses the changes in the agroecology and behavior of soil climate regimes in the Great Plains and connections to El Nino/La Nina events. Introduction Drought is the dominant process of crop loss nationally and within Nebraska. As Table 1 illustrates, on a statewide basis for Nebraska, nearly two-thirds of the 18.6 million harvested acres are covered by crop insurance.
  • Prairie Wetland Soils: Gleysolic and Organic Angela Bedard-Haughn Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan

    Prairie Wetland Soils: Gleysolic and Organic Angela Bedard-Haughn Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan

    PS&C Prairie Soils & Crops Journal Agricultural Soils of the Prairies Prairie Wetland Soils: Gleysolic and Organic Angela Bedard-Haughn Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan Summary Gleysolic and Organic soils are collectively referred to as “wetland soils”. They are found in wet low-lying or level landscape positions. Gleysolic soils are found throughout the agricultural Prairies, in association with Chernozemic and Luvisolic soils. In semi-arid regions, they are frequently tilled in dry years and can be very productive due to their relatively high levels of soil moisture and nutrients. In the Prairie Provinces, Organic soils tend to be mostly associated with the Boreal transition zones at the northern and eastern perimeter of the Prairies. With proper management, these can also provide productive agricultural land, particularly for forages. Introduction Soils of the Gleysolic and Organic orders are collectively referred to as “wetland soils”. Soil maps of the agricultural region of the Canadian Prairies seldom have areas mapped as dominantly Gleysolic8 or Organic9; however, these soils are found throughout the region wherever climate and/or topography have led to persistent water-saturated conditions. Gleysols are mineral soils with colors that reflect intermittent or prolonged anaerobic (i.e., saturated, low oxygen) conditions (Fig. 1A). Organic soils reflect permanent anaerobic conditions, which lead to soils that are made up of variably decomposed plant residues, mostly from water-tolerant (i.e., hydrophytic) vegetation (Fig. 1B). Figure 1: A) Humic Luvic Gleysol, Saskatchewan and B) Typic Fibrisol (Organic), Manitoba7. Of the some 100,000,000 ha covered by the Canada Land Inventory (CLI) in the Prairie Provinces12, Gleysolic soils occupy less than 15% of the Prairie ecoregions and up to 40% in the Mid-Boreal (boreal = “northern”) Upland (Alberta) and Interlake Plain (Manitoba) ecoregions12.
  • World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014 International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps

    World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014 International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps

    ISSN 0532-0488 WORLD SOIL RESOURCES REPORTS 106 World reference base for soil resources 2014 International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps Update 2015 Cover photographs (left to right): Ekranic Technosol – Austria (©Erika Michéli) Reductaquic Cryosol – Russia (©Maria Gerasimova) Ferralic Nitisol – Australia (©Ben Harms) Pellic Vertisol – Bulgaria (©Erika Michéli) Albic Podzol – Czech Republic (©Erika Michéli) Hypercalcic Kastanozem – Mexico (©Carlos Cruz Gaistardo) Stagnic Luvisol – South Africa (©Márta Fuchs) Copies of FAO publications can be requested from: SALES AND MARKETING GROUP Information Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome, Italy E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (+39) 06 57053360 Web site: http://www.fao.org WORLD SOIL World reference base RESOURCES REPORTS for soil resources 2014 106 International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps Update 2015 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2015 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.
  • Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties

    Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties

    Open Journal of Soil Science, 2015, 5, 101-109 Published Online May 2015 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojss http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2015.55010 Phosphorus Adsorption of Some Brazilian Soils in Relations to Selected Soil Properties Valdinar Ferreira Melo1*, Sandra Cátia Pereira Uchôa1, Zachary N. Senwo2*, Ronilson José Pedroso Amorim3 1Department of Soil and Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Roraima, Boa Vista, Brazil 2Department of Biological & Environmental Sciences, Alabama A&M University, Huntsville, USA 3Agronomy, Federal University of Roraima, Boa Vista, Brazil Email: *[email protected], *[email protected] Received 3 April 2015; accepted 17 May 2015; published 20 May 2015 Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Abstract A major nutritional problem to crops grown in highly weathered Brazilian soils is phosphorus (P) deficiencies linked to their low availability and the capacity of the soils to fix P in insoluble forms. Our studies examined factors that might influence P behavior in soils of the Amazon region. This study was conducted to evaluate the maximum phosphate adsorption capacity (MPAC) of the soils developed from mafic rocks (diabase), their parent materials and other factors resulting in the formation of eutrophic soils having A chernozemic horizon associated with Red Nitosols (Alfisol) and Red Latosols (Oxisol) of the Amazonian environment. The MPAC was determined in triplicates as a function of the remnant P values. The different concentrations used to determine the MPAC allowed maximum adsorption values to be reached for all soils.
  • Keys to Soil Taxonomy

    Keys to Soil Taxonomy

    United States Department of Agriculture Keys to Soil Taxonomy Ninth Edition, 2003 Keys to Soil Taxonomy By Soil Survey Staff United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Ninth Edition, 2003 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Cover: A natric horizon with columnar structure in a Natrudoll from Argentina. 5 Table of Contents Foreword .................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1: The Soils That We Classify.................................................................................. 9 Chapter 2: Differentiae for Mineral Soils and Organic Soils ............................................... 11 Chapter 3: Horizons and Characteristics Diagnostic for the Higher Categories .................
  • Diagnostic Horizons

    Diagnostic Horizons

    Exam III Wednesday, November 7th Study Guide Posted Tomorrow Review Session in Class on Monday the 4th Soil Taxonomy and Classification Diagnostic Horizons Epipedons Subsurface Mollic Albic Umbric Kandic Ochric Histic Argillic Melanic Spodic Plaggen Anthropic Oxic 1 Surface Horizons: Mollic- thick, dark colored, high %B.S., structure Umbric – same, but lower B.S. Ochric – pale, low O.M., thin Histic – High O.M., thick, wet, dark Sub-Surface Horizons: Argillic – illuvial accum. of clay (high activity) Kandic – accum. of clay (low activity) Spodic – Illuvial O.M. accumulation (Al and/or Fe) Oxic – highly weathered, kaolinite, Fe and Al oxides Albic – light colored, elluvial, low reactivity Elluviation and Illuviation Elluviation (E horizon) Organic matter Clays A A E E Bh horizon Bt horizon Bh Bt Spodic horizon Argillic horizon 2 Soil Taxonomy Diagnostic Epipedons Diagnostic Subsurface horizons Moisture Regimes Temperature Regimes Age Texture Depth Soil Taxonomy Soil forming processes, presence or Order Absence of major diagnostic horizons 12 Similar genesis Suborder 63 Grasslands – thick, dark Great group 250 epipedons High %B.S. Sub group 1400 Family 8000 Series 19,000 Soil Orders Entisols Histosols Inceptisols Andisols Gelisols Alfisols Mollisols Ultisols Spodosols Aridisols Vertisols Oxisols 3 Soil Orders Entisol Ent- Recent Histosol Hist- Histic (organic) Inceptisol Incept- Inception Alfisol Alf- Nonsense Ultisol Ult- Ultimate Spodosol Spod- Spodos (wood ash) Mollisol Moll- Mollis (soft) Oxisol Ox- oxide Andisol And- Ando (black) Gelisol
  • Drained Organic Soils Under Agriculture

    Drained Organic Soils Under Agriculture

    Geoderma 355 (2019) 113911 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Geoderma journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geoderma Drained organic soils under agriculture — The more degraded the soil the higher the specific basal respiration T ⁎ Annelie Säuricha,1, Bärbel Tiemeyera, , Axel Dona, Sabine Fiedlerb, Michel Bechtolda,2, Wulf Amelungc, Annette Freibauera,3 a Thünen Institute of Climate-Smart Agriculture, Bundesallee 65, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany b Institute for Geography, Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany c University of Bonn, Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation, Soil Science and Soil Ecology, Nussallee 13, 53115 Bonn, Germany ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Handling Editor: Ingrid Kögel-Knabner Drained peatlands are hotspots of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from agricultural soils. As a consequence of Keywords: both drainage-induced mineralisation and anthropogenic mixing with mineral soils, large areas of former Carbon dioxide peatlands under agricultural use underwent a secondary transformation of the peat (e.g. formation of ag- Peatland agriculture gregates). These soils show contents of soil organic carbon (SOC) at the boundary between mineral and organic Heinemeyer incubation soils. However, the carbon (C) dynamics of such soils have rarely been studied so far. The aim of the present Anthropogenic disturbance study was to evaluate the vulnerability of soil organic matter (SOM) to decomposition over the whole range of − Peat-sand-mixing peat-derived soils under agriculture including very carbon rich mineral soils (76–526 g kg 1 SOC). A total of 62 soil samples covering a broad range of soil and site characteristics were selected from the sample set of the German Agricultural Soil Inventory.
  • Are CH4, CO2, and N2O Emissions from Soil Affected by the Sources and Doses of N in Warm-Season Pasture?

    Are CH4, CO2, and N2O Emissions from Soil Affected by the Sources and Doses of N in Warm-Season Pasture?

    atmosphere Article Are CH4, CO2, and N2O Emissions from Soil Affected by the Sources and Doses of N in Warm-Season Pasture? Darlena Caroline da Cruz Corrêa, Abmael da Silva Cardoso * , Mariane Rodrigues Ferreira, Débora Siniscalchi, Ariana Desie Toniello, Gilmar Cotrin de Lima, Ricardo Andrade Reis and Ana Claudia Ruggieri Departamento de Zootecnia, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, UNESP—Universty Estadual Paulista, Jaboticabal 14884-900, SP, Brazil; [email protected] (D.C.d.C.C.); [email protected] (M.R.F.); [email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (A.D.T.); [email protected] (G.C.d.L.); [email protected] (R.A.R.); [email protected] (A.C.R.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The intensification of pasture production has increased the use of N fertilizers—a practice that can alter soil greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the fluxes of CH4, CO2, and N2O in the soil of Urochloa brizantha ‘Marandu’ pastures fertilized with different sources and doses of N. Two field experiments were conducted to evaluate GHG fluxes following N fertilization with urea, ammonium nitrate, and ammonium sulfate at doses of 0, 90, 180, and 270 kg N ha−1. GHG fluxes were quantified using the static chamber technique and gas chromatography. In both experiments, the sources and doses of N did not significantly affect cumulative GHG emissions, while N fertilization significantly affected cumulative N O and CO 2 2 emissions compared to the control treatment. The N2O emission factor following fertilization with urea, ammonium nitrate, and ammonium sulfate was lower than the United Nations’ Intergovern- Citation: Corrêa, D.C.d.C.; Cardoso, A.d.S.; Ferreira, M.R.; Siniscalchi, D.; mental Panel on Climate Change standard (0.35%, 0.24%, and 0.21%, respectively, with fractionation Toniello, A.D.; Lima, G.C.d.; Reis, fertilization and 1.00%, 0.83%, and 1.03%, respectively, with single fertilization).