Printer Friendly

Soil organic carbon contents of two natural inland saline-alkalined wetlands in northeastern China.

Wetlands represent the largest component of the terrestrial biological carbon pool (Dixon and Krankina 1995) and may exert a large influence on global carbon cycles (Zhang et al. 2002), as they have the ability to sequester atmospheric carbon into peat or soil organic matter (SOM) (Matthews and Fung 1987; Turunen et al. 1999). In contrast to grasslands and forests, the soil volume in many wetlands increases with time over thousands of years; thus, opportunity for C burial in wetlands is high (Connor et al. 2001). Much attention has been given to the role of freshwater wetlands as carbon sinks, particularly northern peatlands (Botch et al. 1995; White and Reddy 2000; Clair et al. 2002; Chmura et al. 2003) because these wetlands store about one third of the global terrestrial soil organic carbon (SOC) (1,395 Gt) (3.07 x [10.sup.15] lb) (Post et al. 1982). Little information is available on carbon sequestration in the many small, scattered salt marshes, especially inland saline-alkalined wetlands. Chmura et al. (2003) estimated the amount of carbon stored globally in soils of salt marshes and mangrove swamps, but it may be underestimated due to few detailed areal inventories for salt marshes in China and South America.

Carbon cycles in wetland ecosystems are regulated by a series of interacting processes between soil, hydrology and vegetation (Zhang et al. 2002), of which hydrology is probably the single most important determinant of ecological processes (Gosselink and Turner 1978). A wetland's ability to retain carbon is determined in large part by its ability to remain wet, as SOM decomposition is inhibited by partial or complete waterlogging, from a combination of topographic position and local groundwater hydrology (Post 1993). Billings et al. (1982) found that lowering the water table in these typically waterlogged soils decreased ecosystem C storage more than increased temperature, primarily by stimulating soil decomposition (Peterson et al. 1984). More recently, Moore and Dalva (1997) reported that the high water table and its fluctuation are the primary factors driving SOC decomposition in wetland soils. When a soil is shifting from saturated to unsaturated conditions, the oxidative reactions will be enhanced, resulting in increased soil C[O.sub.2] emission and decreased [N.sub.2]O or C[H.sub.4] emissions (Li et al. 2004). Therefore, a shift in seasonal hydrology may have measurable impacts on the accumulation or loss of organic carbon from wetland soils (Clair et al. 2002), thus influencing the C balance of wetlands. However, the differences of SOC contents in saline-alkalined wetlands with different hydrological conditions are poorly known.

The objectives of this study are (1) to study and compare SOC contents of two types of saline-alkalined wetlands with different hydrological conditions; (2) to study vertical distribution of SOC contents in those wetlands; and (3) to determine the relationship between SOC contents and soil properties of wetlands.

Materials and Methods

Site Description. Xianghai wetland is one of "wetlands of international importance" (China State Forestry Administration 2001) and is a typical inland riverine wetland with the area of about 236 [km.sup.2] (91.1 [mi.sup.2]), located downstream of the Houlin River catchment of Jilin Province, in Northeast China (122[degrees]05' and 122[degrees]31' E; 44[degrees]55' and 45[degrees]09' N; figure 1). Xianghai wetland was listed as the National Nature Reserve in 1986. It lies in the semi-arid grassland zone of the north temperate region and belongs to the continental monsoon climate, with a mean annual temperature of 5.1[degrees]C (41.18[degrees]F). This region is arid with an annual water deficit of 1,536.8 mm [yr.sup.-1] (60.55 in [yr.sup.-1]) due to evaporation (1,945 mm [yr.sup.-1]) (76.63 in [yr.sup.-1]) exceeding precipitation (408.2 mm [yr.sup.-1])(16.08 in [yr.sup.-1])(Zhao 1999). The dry season occurs from November to April while wet season is from June to September. During 1999 to 2001, the climate was drier than normal: mean annual air temperature increased by 2[degrees]C (35.6[degrees]F); mean annual precipitation decreased by 138 mm (5.44 in); and mean annual evaporation increased by 580 mm (22.85 in). The dominant species of marsh vegetation is Phragmites australis, and the companion species include Potentilla anse-rina, Salix brachypoda, Alisma plantago-aquatica, Isoetes acustris, and Plantago asiatica.

Erbaifangzi (EBFZ) and Fulaowenpao (FLWP) were chosen as two typical sites in Xianghai wetland. EBFZ, the open wetland (open to hydrologic fluxes with other systems) with soil salt content of 0.38%, is located in the downstream floodplain. FLWP, located in the backwater area, with soil salt content of 0.51%, is a closed wetland (isolated from hydrologic fluxes with other systems). Water tables in the two sites often fluctuate with dry and wet seasons, ranging from -40 to 20 cm (-15.76 to 7.88 in) and -10 to 30 cm (-3.94 to 11.81 in) in FLWP and EBFZ, respectively. Drying and wetting cycles are more obvious in FLWP, because water supply depends on floods at the site. However, EBFZ often remains waterlogged or overwet because of close hydraulic connections with river water.

Sampling and Analysis Methods. Each site was subdivided into six sampling plots. In each plot, five soil cores were randomly collected in a depth from 0 to 100 cm (0 to 39.38 in), with 10-cm (3.938 in) intervals in 2001, for a grand total of 600 soil samples. All soil samples were taken to the lab and air-dried for three weeks. Recognizable plant litters, coarse root materials, and stones were removed from the air-dried soils. Each soil sample was mixed completely and then equally divided into three parts, where one part was used for the analysis of soil texture, another part was ground to fine power using a muller and was sieved through 2-mm (0.079 in) sieve for determining SOC contents, and the third part was ground and sieved through an 0.18-mm (0.007 in) sieve for determining TP, total nitrogen (TN) and pH.

Soil organic matter was determined by the Walkley and Black (1934) method and TN was measured with the Kjeldahl method (Honda 1962; Lu 1999). Total phosphorous was extracted from soils with 1N HCl after ignition at 550[degrees]C (1,022[degrees]F)(Asplia et al. 1976). Soil pH was measured with electrical conduction method (soil:water = 1:5), and soil particle size analysis was carried out on a particle size analyzer RS-1000 (made in Japan). Bulk density was calculated for the soil intervals on a dry weight basis.

Calculation of Soil Organic Carbon Content. The most appropriate way to study the organic carbon content of soil was on a unit area basis for a specified depth interval (Batjes and Dijkshoorn 1999). Commonly, reference depth intervals of 0 to 0.3 m (0 to 11.82 in) and 0 to 1 m (0 to 1.094 yd) were used in studies of soil organic C pools (Eswaran et al. 1993; Batjes 1996). The soil organic C density (SOCD), the mass of C per unit of surface area (g [m.sup.-2]) in a given soil layer, was calculated by multiplying the C concentration in the unit volume of soil by the thickness of the layer. The total SOCD of the sampled 30-cm (11.81 in) deep and 100-cm (39.38 in) deep soil layer was then calculated by summing all C densities of the sublayers (Turunen et al. 1999).

For an individual profile with n layers, the total SOC content by volume (SOCD) was calculated as the modified Wu's method (Wu et al. 2003):

TC = [n.summation over (i=1)] 0.58 x [D.sub.i] x [B.sub.i] x O[M.sub.i],

where n is the number of soil layers, 0.58 is the Bemmelen index that converts organic matter concentration to organic carbon, TC is SOCD (in Kg [m.sup.-2]) over depth, [D.sub.i] is the thickness of layer i, [B.sub.i] is the bulk density (g [m.sup.-3]) of layer i, and O[M.sub.i] is the content of organic matter.

Statistical Analysis. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the differences in soil characteristics and soil carbon densities among the two sites and soil depths. Soil characterization data from six sampling plots in each site were utilized to calculate the mean and standard deviation for bulk density, SOM, TN and TP, C/N, sand, silt and clay. Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to determine relationships between soil characterization data and SOCD. Analyses were conducted using SPSS 10.0 statistical package and Origin 6.0 software package. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05.

Results and Discussion

Soil Characterization. The selected physicochemical properties of the soils from study sites are listed in table 1. The soils from two saline-alkalined wetlands were characterized by high pH values (8.78 to 9.85), and high variability of dry bulk densities between soil layers (ranging from 1.2 to 1.77 g [cm.sup.-3] and from 1.1 to 1.50 g [cm.sup.-3], respectively) (table 1). Higher soil pH values appeared in deeper soil layers in both sites, while soil pH values in FLWP were significantly higher (p < 0.01) than those in EBFZ. Similarly, bulk densities were significantly higher (p< 0.01) in FLWP than those in EBFZ, with significantly higher values in the underlying soil depths of top soils (p < 0.01). Sand contents in top soils of EBFZ were much lower by about 76.8% than those of FLWP, but silt and clay contents were greatly higher (p < 0.01). Soil particle size did not greatly differ from underlying soil depths between the two wetlands (p < 0.05). Soil organic matter percentages and TN concentrations generally decreased with depth in soil profiles and were higher in 0-to 10-cm (0- to 3.938-in) and 10- to 20-cm (3.938- to 7.88-in) soil depths in FLWP than those in EBFZ, but lower for the underlying soil depths. TP was significantly negatively correlated with depth in both sites (p < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference for SOM, TN or TP contents between both sites (p < 0.05) (table 2).

Soil Organic Carbon Density. SOCDs of both wetland sites were much lower by 43% to 92% than those of other wetlands in China, only accounting for 6% to 8% of the mean SOCD of wetlands in Northeast China (table 3). Moreover, the global mean SOCD of salt marshes (39 [+ or -] 3 kg [m.sup.-2]) (Chmura et al. 2003) was also higher by 78% than the values of this study, thus suggesting inland saline-alkalined wetlands had lower C storage compared with other types of wetlands.

Mean SOCD was 8.23 [+ or -] 1.40 kg C [m.sup.-2] in the upper 100 cm (39.38 in) of EBFZ, higher by about 41% than that of FLWP (table 3), which means that the open wetland had larger C storage than the closed wetland. This was likely related to water table fluctuations in FLWP because drying and wetting cycles favored SOM decomposition and the liberation of C from leaf litter (Baldwin and Mitchell 2000; Bai et al. 2005a). Chen and Li (2003) also found that rapid leaf decomposition in moist areas, especially in wetlands with variable water tables, led to the greatest loss of soil C, which could be attributed to changes in some biological and physical processes in the soils (Bouwman 1990). In addition, because floodwater was the only water source supplying FLWP, flood inputs were identified as one of the key factors regulating organic matter accumulation. Flood pulses can deposit large amounts of organic matter (Jacobson 1997) and trigger the activity of soil microorganisms, directly influencing decomposition and carbon mineralization rates (Jacobson et al. 2000).

Vertical Changes of Soil Organic Carbon Density. SOCD generally decreased with depth in soil profiles in both FLWP and EBFZ, with the highest values 2.64 kg C [m.sup.-2] and 2.14 kg C [m.sup.-2] in top soils, respectively (figure 2). More than 50% of SOC was stored in the upper 30 cm (11.81 in) in both sites. Plant litter inputs, below-ground biomass, and flood deposits could explain higher soil carbon contents of the upper soils. In both sites, plant litter inputs (302.56 g [m.sup.-2] [yr.sup.-1], FLWP; 309.72 g [m.sup.-2] [yr.sup.-1], EBFZ) were one major source of SOM, which accumulated on surface soils, and organic carbon could be incorporated to top soils with the decomposition of plant litter. Battle and Mihuc (2000) also reported that there was significant positive correlation between plant litter inputs and soil carbon contents. Belowground biomass was another important source, since 70% of below-ground biomass was distributed in the upper 40 cm (15.76 in) in both sites (Bai 2003), and root systems could fix a great deal of carbon (Chen and Li 2003). In addition, flood pulses could result in C accumulation in those upper soil layers by depositing large amounts of organic matter to the surface soils (Jacobson 1997).

Although SOC contents in deeper soil layers were generally lower, they could not be ignored since the contribution rates of soil layers below a depth of 50 cm (19.69 in) in FLWP and EBFZ were 22% and 32%, respectively.

Relationship between Soil Organic Carbon Density and Soil Properties. Many studies have shown that the soil C pool is affected by climate, landscape age, soil properties, and human activities (Post et al. 1982; Amundson and Jenny 1997). Soil properties were also found to greatly influence SOC contents in this study (table 2). Soil organic carbon density was significantly correlated with SOM, TN, C/N and TP for all the soils (p < 0.001). The initial composition of soil nutrients would affect their decomposition rates (Lisanework and Michelsen 1994; Couteaux et al. 1995). Soils were abundant in N in both sites as indicated by C:N generally <25 (Yang 1997). Low C:N ratios favor decomposition of SOM (Kadono et al. 2002), which might also be an important factor for lowering SOC contents. In addition, there was also a significantly negative correlation between SOCD and soil pH, which supported the conclusion that the closed wetland had lower C storage, since there was higher alkalinity in the closed wetland than in the open wetland due to drought in recent years (Bai et al. 2005b).

Soil texture greatly impacted SOC contents. The presence of larger SOC stocks in fine-textured compared to coarse-textured soils under the same climate had been widely noted previously (Parton et al. 1987). In this study, we found that SOC contents were negatively significantly correlated with sand contents (p < 0.001), but positively significantly correlated with silt (p < 0.01) and clay contents (p < 0.001). This was in good agreement with the conclusion reported by Oades (1988) and Jacobson et al. (2000). The reason SOC contents were higher in top soils in this study was because the fine texture of clay soils in surface soils was more likely to allow organic matter particles to remain (Bird et al. 2000).

Summary and Conclusions

The two inland saline-alkalined wetlands have much lower SOC contents than those in other wetlands in China, even lower than the global average SOC content in salt marshes, which is closely linked to dry climate and water deficit in this region. SOC contents decrease with depth in soil profiles in the two sites, which is significantly influenced by plant litter, root distribution, rhizodeposits and flood deposition. Although SOC is mainly stored in the upper 30 cm in both sites, SOC stored below the 30-cm depth can't be ignored since it accounts for more than 40% of C storage. Soil nutrients, soil texture and soil pH are important factors influencing SOC storage. SOCD were positively significantly correlated with SOM, TN, TP and clay contents (p < 0.001) and negatively significantly correlated with sand contents (p < 0.001). There was also a significant correlation between SOCD and soil pH, C/N or silt content at the level of p < 0.01. Higher SOC contents appeared in the open wetland due to waterlogged or wetter hydrological conditions compared with the drier closed wetland. Besides the dry climate, the regional plan to build the Baiyunhua reservoir upstream of the Huolin river will also be a potential threat, causing the downstream wetlands to face serious water shortages. Ecological water supplement, that is, water supplement based on ecological water requirement to maintain ecosystem health, may be necessary to mitigate water shortages and increase carbon storage of wetlands in semi-arid and arid regions. Although more studies still need carried out to further confirm the above conclusions, this study provides basic data for carbon stocks in wetland soils at the regional or global scale.


This study was financially supported by the National Basic Research Program (No. 2006CB403301) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 40701003). We express our thanks to the reviewers and Dr. Kenneth N. Potter for helpful and thoughtful comments and suggestions to improve this paper. We also thank the analysis center of Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences.


Amundson, R., and H. Jenny. 1997. On a state factor model of ecosystems. BioScience 47:536-543.

Asplia, K.I., H. Agemian, and A.S.Y. Chau. 1976. A semiautomated method for the determination of inorganic, organic and total phosphate in sediments. Analyst 101:187-197.

Bai, J. 2003. Biogeochemical processes of nitrogen in marsh soils from Xianghai wetland, China. PhD dissertation, Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun, China (in Chinese).

Bai, J., H. Ouyang, W. Deng, Y. Zhu, X. Zhang, and Q. Wang. 2005a. Spatial distribution characteristics of organic matter and total nitrogen of marsh soils in river marginal wetlands. Geoderma 124:181-192.

Bai, J., H. Ouyang, W. Deng, C. Zhou, and H. Chen. 2005b. Nitrogen mineralization processes of soils from natural saline-alkalined wetlands, Xianghai National Nature Reserve, China. Canadian Journal of Soil Sciences 85(3):359-367.

Baldwin, D.S., and A.M. Mitchell. 2000. The effects of drying and re-flooding on the sediment and soil nutrient dynamics of lowland river-floodplain systems. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 16(5):457-467.

Batjes, N.H. 1996. Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world. European Journal of Soil Science 47:151-163.

Batjes, N.H., and J.A. Dijkshoorn, 1999. Carbon and nitrogen stocks in the soils of the Amazon Region. Geoderma 89:273-286.

Battle, J.M., and T.B. Mihuc. 2000. Decomposition dynamics of aquatic macrophytes in the lower Atchafalaya, a large floodplain river. Hydrobiologia 418(1):123-136.

Billings, W.D., J.O. Luken, D.A. Mortenson, and K.M. Peterson. 1982. Arctic tundra: A source or sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide in a changing environment? Oecologia 53:7-11.

Bird, M.I., E.M. Veenendaal, C. Moyo, J. Lloyd, and P. Frost. 2000. Effect of fire and soil texture on soil carbon in a sub-humid savanna Matopos, Zimbabwe. Geoderma 94:71-90.

Botch, M.S., K.I. Kobak, T.S. Vinson, and T.P. Kolchugina. 1995. Carbon pools and accumulation in peatlands of the former Soviet Union. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9(1):37-46.

Bouwman, A.F. 1990. Exchange of greenhourse gases between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere. In Soils and the Greenhouse Effect, ed. A.F. Bouwan, 61-79. New York: John Willey and Sons Ltd.

Chen, X., and B. Li. 2003. Change in soil carbon and nutrient storage after human disturbance of a primary Korean pine forest in Northeast China. Forest Ecology and Management 186:197-206.

China State Forestry Administration. 2001. Guidelines of Wetlands Convention. China Forestry Press, Beijing. (in Chinese).

Chmura, G.L., S.C. Anisfeld, D.R. Cahoon, and J.C. Lynch. 2003. Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 17(4):22-1-22-12.

Clair, T.A., P. Arp, T.R. Moore, M. Dalya, and F.R. Meng. 2002. Gaseous carbon dioxide and methane, as well as dissolved organic carbon losses from a small temperate wetland under a changing climate. Environmental Pollution 116:S143-S148.

Connor, R.F., G.L. Chmur, and B.C. Beth. 2001. Carbon accumulation in Bay of Fundy salt marshes: Implications for restoration of reclaimed marshes. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15(4):943-954.

Couteaux, M.M., P. Bottuer, and B. Berg. 1995. Litter decomposition, climate and litter quality. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10:63-66.

Dixon, R.K., and O.N. Krankina. 1995. Can the terrestrial biosphere be managed to conserve and sequester carbon? In: Carbon Sequestration in the Biosphere: Processes and Products, NATO ASI Ser. I, Global Environmental Change, ed. M. A. Beran, 153-179. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Eswaran, H., E. Van Den Berg, and P. Reich. 1993. Organic carbon in soils of the world. Soil Science Society of America Journal 57:192-194.

Gosselink, J.G., and R.E. Turner. 1978. The role of hydrology in freshwater wetland ecosystems. In Freshwater Wetlands: Ecologhical Processes and Management Potential, ed. R.E. Good, D.F. Whigham, and R.L. Simpson, 63-78. New York: Academic Press.

Honda, C. 1962. Rapid procedure for determination of nitrogen in soil by Kjeldahl method. Japan Journal of Soil and Manure (Japan) 33:195-200.

Jacobson, P.J. 1997. An ephemeral perspective of fluvial ecosystems: Viewing ephemeral rivers in the context of current lotic ecology. PhD dissertation, Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Satate University.

Jacobson, P.J., K.M. Jacobson, P.L. Angermeier, and D.S. Cherry. 2000. Hydrologic influences on soil properties along ephemeral rivers in the Namib Desert. Journal of Arid Environments 45:21-34.

Kadono, A., S. Funokwa, and T. Kosaki. 2002. Factors controlling mineralization of soil organic matter in humid Asia. In: Abstract, Congress of International Soil Science Symposia 2002, 1-12.

Li, C., J. Cui, G. Sun, and C. Trettin. 2004. Modelling impacts of management on carbon sequestration and trace gas emissions in forested wetland ecosystems. Environmental Management 33 (Supplement 1): S176-S186.

Lisanework, N., and A. Michelsen. 1994. Litterfall and nutrient release by decomposition in three plantations compared with a natural forest in the Ethiopian highland. Forest Ecology and Management 65:149-164.

Lu, D. 1999. American Floodplain Management in the 21st century. Jinan, China: Yellow River Irrigation Press. (in Chinese).

Matthews, E., and I. Fung. 1987. Methane emission from natural wetlands: Global distribution, area and environmental characteristics. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 1:61-86.

Moore, T.R., and M. Dalva. 1997. Methane and carbon dioxide exchange potentials of peat soils in aerobic and anaerobic laboratory incubations. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 29:1157-1164.

Oades, J.M. 1988. The retention of organic matter in soil. Biogeochemistry 5:35-70.

Parton, W.J., D.S. Schimel, C.V. Cole, and D.S. Ojima. 1987. Analysis of factors controlling soil organic matter levels in Great Plains grassland. Soil Science Society of American Journal 51:1173-1179.

Peterson, K.M., W.D. Billings, and S.J. Reynolds. 1984. Influence of water table and atmospheric C[O.sub.2] concentration on the carbon balance of arctic tundra. Arctic Antarctic and Alpine Research 16(3):331-335.

Post, W.M. 1993. Organic carbon in soil and the global carbon cycle. In The Global Carbon Cycle, ed. M. Heimann, 277-302. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Press.

Post, W.M., W.R. Emanuel, and P.J. Zinke. 1982. Soil carbon pools and world life zones. Nature 298:156-159.

Turunen, J., K. Tolonen, S. Tolvanen, M. Remes, J. Ronkainen, and H. Jungner. 1999. Carbon accumulation in the mineral subsoil of boreal mires. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 13(1):71-79.

Walkley, A., and I.A. Black. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 38:29-37.

White, J.R., and K.R. Reddy. 2000. Influence of phosphorous loading on organic nitrogen mineralization of Everglades soils. Soil Science Society of American Journal 64:1525-1534.

Wu H., Z. Guo, and C. Peng. 2003. Land use induced changes of organic carbon storage in soils of China. Global Change Biology 9:305-315.

Yang, Y. 1997. Microbiologh. Higher Education Press, Beijing, 182 (in Chinese).

Zhang Y., C. Li, C. Trettin, H. Li, and G. Sun. 2002. An integrated model of soil, hydrology, and vegetation for carbon dynamics in wetland ecosystems. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16(4):1-17.

Zhao, Q. 1999. Chinese Marsh Record, 255-260 Beijing: Science Press (in Chinese).

Junhong Bai is an associate professor and Baoshan Cui is a professor at the State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. Wei Deng is a researcher/professor at the Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China. Zhifeng Yang is a professor at the State key laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. Qinggai Wang is a senior engineer at the Appraisal Center for Environment and Engineering, State Environmental Protection Administration, Beijing, China. Qiuyi Ding is a master's student at the State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Table 1 Physico-chemical properties of soils in Fulaowenpao (FLWP) and
Erbaifangzi (EBFZ).

layers                  SOM          In-C         TN
(cm)       pH           (%)          (%)          (mg [kg.sup.-1])

 0 to 10   9.39 (0.46)  4.13 (2.40)  2.30 (0.44)  2,591.80 (781.05)
10 to 20   9.65 (0.30)  1.76 (0.89)  2.04 (0.55)  1,005.46 (695.61)
20 to 30   9.74 (0.25)  0.74 (0.34)  2.17 (0.57)    429.24 (187.93)
30 to 40   9.81 (0.24)  0.48 (0.23)  2.17 (0.59)    532.58 (266.64)
40 to 50   9.85 (0.21)  0.59 (0.26)  2.05 (0.62)    330.61 (235.65)
50 to 60   9.84 (0.20)  0.45 (0.29)  1.90 (0.66)    181.67 (45.65)
60 to 70   9.73 (0.13)  0.26 (0.15)  2.01 (0.63)    226.33 (76.32)
70 to 80   9.70 (0.14)  0.24 (0.12)  1.95 (0.61)    257.24 (135.80)
80 to 90   9.67 (0.15)  0.22 (0.12)  1.86 (0.53)    244.41 (180.63)
90 to 100  9.69 (0.18)  0.31 (0.15)  1.79 (0.52)    204.37 (70.02)

 0 to 10   8.78 (0.59)  4.32 (1.67)  1.16 (0.25)  2,046.46 (672.34)
10 to 20   8.81 (0.53)  1.92 (0.95)  0.80 (0.27)    924.18 (467.62)
20 to 30   8.87 (0.32)  0.90 (0.43)  1.18 (0.33)    775.84 (285.65)
30 to 40   8.81 (0.32)  0.97 (0.47)  1.71 (0.43)    536.68 (176.83)
40 to 50   8.82 (0.31)  0.45 (0.26)  1.92 (0.52)    412.57 (151.45)
50 to 60   8.88 (0.21)  0.47 (0.28)  2.18 (0.54)    386.40 (206.88)
60 to 70   8.83 (0.27)  0.50 (0.24)  2.47 (0.56)    319.78 (108.42)
70 to 80   8.83 (0.31)  0.52 (0.27)  2.49 (0.56)    288.89 (88.74)
80 to 90   8.86 (0.32)  0.57 (0.31)  2.12 (0.51)    406.18 (133.45)
90 to 100  9.02 (0.19)  0.41 (0.21)  2.42 (0.53)    256.48 (92.06)

Soil                                                      Silt (%)
layers     TP                               Sand (%)      0.05 to
(cm)       (mg [kg.sup.-1])  C/N ratio      >0.05 mm      0.005 mm

 0 to 10   276.48 (70.36)    14.80 (13.03)  77.44 (2.13)  10.50 (0.65)
10 to 20   149.37 (49.78)    11.46 (3.37)   77.73 (1.71)  15.69 (1.33)
20 to 30   104.16 (39.03)    10.87 (5.70)   76.20 (1.23)  19.92 (1.42)
30 to 40    83.17 (29.93)     5.98 (4.93)   82.85 (1.87)  15.25 (1.29)
40 to 50    84.49 (37.12)     9.94 (2.73)   83.75 (1.89)  14.45 (1.21)
50 to 60    74.70 (29.00)    15.54 (10.27)  82.23 (1.73)  16.76 (1.19)
60 to 70    87.02 (30.05)     8.15 (5.70)   80.82 (1.07)  17.61 (1.05)
70 to 80    89.37 (38.86)     5.34 (3.30)   82.99 (1.09)  17.01 (1.02)
80 to 90    81.80 (32.29)     5.37 (2.51)   77.98 (1.03)  19.42 (1.02)
90 to 100   83.31 (35.23)     7.95 (6.72)   74.34 (1.02)  21.78 (1.12)

 0 to 10   279.04 (177.96)   11.17 (1.33)   17.98 (2.10)  45.19 (1.68)
10 to 20   116.29 (60.58)     9.72 (3.23)   79.39 (1.69)  14.76 (1.12)
20 to 30   113.80 (53.35)     6.64 (2.35)   88.36 (1.34)   9.77 (1.23)
30 to 40   107.66 (51.32)    10.77 (5.83)   85.18 (1.33)  12.91 (1.06)
40 to 50    94.85 (33.55)     6.26 (2.70)   78.95 (1.24)  19.12 (1.13)
50 to 60    96.77 (38.28)     8.03 (5.49)   79.01 (1.09)  18.26 (1.05)
60 to 70   102.41 (41.50)     9.07 (2.59)   76.54 (1.11)  24.46 (1.01)
70 to 80    96.25 (44.13)     9.65 (5.06)   69.81 (1.02)  23.55 (0.96)
80 to 90    93.27 (45.31)    10.0  (6.64)   74.21 (1.03)  19.08 (1.12)
90 to 100   88.20 (47.00)     8.29 (4.72)   72.36 (1.02)  23.82 (0.98)

Soil                     Bulk
layers     Clay (%)      density
(cm)       <0.005 mm     (g [cm.sup.-3])

 0 to 10   12.06 (1.21)  1.20 (0.23)
10 to 20    6.59 (1.04)  1.46 (0.27)
20 to 30    3.88 (0.76)  1.58 (0.17)
30 to 40    1.89 (0.34)  1.63 (0.19)
40 to 50    1.80 (0.23)  1.67 (0.13)
50 to 60    1.01 (0.06)  1.71 (0.13)
60 to 70    1.57 (0.11)  1.73 (0.11)
70 to 80    0.00 (0.00)  1.72 (0.12)
80 to 90    2.60 (0.45)  1.77 (0.14)
90 to 100   3.89 (0.42)  1.74 (0.15)

 0 to 10   27.63 (1.34)  1.10 (0.19)
10 to 20    5.85 (1.15)  1.39 (0.15)
20 to 30    1.85 (0.95)  1.41 (0.14)
30 to 40    1.92 (0.78)  1.44 (0.11)
40 to 50    1.93 (0.92)  1.42 (0.13)
50 to 60    2.73 (0.98)  1.45 (0.13)
60 to 70    1.99 (0.75)  1.50 (0.15)
70 to 80    6.64 (1.13)  1.47 (0.11)
80 to 90    6.70 (0.89)  1.47 (0.97)
90 to 100   3.81 (1.04)  1.46 (0.89)

Note: Data are mean values from 30 soil profiles with one standard
deviation in parentheses.

Table 2 Relationship between soil carbon density with soil properties.

              SOCD            SOM             TP

SOCD           1.000
Percent SOM    0.987*          1.000
TP             0.722*          0.768*          1.000
TN             0.804*          0.840*          0.719*
pH            -0.323[dagger]  -0.319[dagger]  -0.223[double dagger]
Percent sand  -0.515*         -0.580*         -0.475*
Percent silt   0.266[dagger]   0.323*          0.282[dagger]
Percent clay   0.701*          0.765*          0.612*
C:N ratio      0.357*          0.286[dagger]   0.086

                                                     Percent  Percent
              TN              pH                     sand     silt

Percent SOM
TN             1.000
pH            -0.298[dagger]   1.000
Percent sand  -0.386*          0.263[dagger]          1.000
Percent silt   0.112          -0.229[double dagger]  -0.925*  1.000
Percent clay   0.616*         -0.266*                -0.919*  0.710*
C:N ratio     -0.083           0.037                 -0.086   0.020

              clay     C:N ratio

Percent SOM
Percent sand
Percent silt
Percent clay  1.000
C:N ratio     0.152    1.000

Notes: n = 120 from two wetlands (average data in each sampling plot).
SOCD = soil organic carbon density; SOM = soil organic matter; TP =
total phosphorus; TN = total nitrogen.
* Significantly correlated at the level of p < 0.001.
[dagger] Significantly correlated at the level of p < 0.01.
[double dagger] Significantly correlated at the level of p < 0.05.

Table 3 SOC contents of different wetlands in China.

                          SOC   SOCD
Location                  (%)   (kg C [m.sup.-2])      Reference

Erbaifangzi, Jilin        0.80    8.23 [+ or -] 1.40*  This study
  Province (marsh)
Fulaowenpao, Jilin        0.53    5.82 [+ or -] 1.15*  This study
  Province (marsh)
Guangdong Province        2.18   21.15                 Gan et al. 2003
Circum Bohai region       1.83   22.90                 Liu et al. 2003
Inner Mongolia (marsh)    1.21   14.48                 Chen et al. 2003
Inner Mongolia (fen)      3.62   30.42                 Chen et al. 2003
Northeast China (fen)     --     92.55                 Wang et al. 2002
North, west, and central  --     11.6-13               Ni 2002
  China (swamps)
China (marsh)             7.13   79.42                 Wang et al. 1999
China (fen)               --     47.96                 Wang et al. 1999
China (wet grassland      --    101.11                 Wang et al. 1999

Notes: SOC = soil organic carbon; SOCD = soil organic carbon density.
*Mean SOCD of 30 soil profiles [+ or -] standard deviation.
COPYRIGHT 2007 Soil & Water Conservation Society
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2007 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Bai, J.; Cui, B.; Deng, W.; Yang, Z.; Wang, Q.; Ding, Q.
Publication:Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:9CHIN
Date:Nov 1, 2007
Previous Article:Drainage water management impact on farm profitability.
Next Article:Sediment retention by forested filter strips in the Piedmont of Georgia.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |