Letter | Published:

Increased tree carbon storage in response to nitrogen deposition in the US

Nature Geoscience volume 3, pages 1317 (2010) | Download Citation



Human activities have greatly accelerated emissions of both carbon dioxide and biologically reactive nitrogen to the atmosphere1,2. As nitrogen availability often limits forest productivity3, it has long been expected that anthropogenic nitrogen deposition could stimulate carbon sequestration in forests4. However, spatially extensive evidence for deposition-induced stimulation of forest growth has been lacking, and quantitative estimates from models and plot-level studies are controversial5,6,7,8,9,10. Here, we use forest inventory data to examine the impact of nitrogen deposition on tree growth, survival and carbon storage across the northeastern and north-central USA during the 1980s and 1990s. We show a range of growth and mortality responses to nitrogen deposition among the region’s 24 most common tree species. Nitrogen deposition (which ranged from 3 to 11 kg ha−1 yr−1) enhanced the growth of 11 species and decreased the growth of 3 species. Nitrogen deposition enhanced growth of all tree species with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi associations. In the absence of disturbances that reduced carbon stocks by more than 50%, above-ground biomass increment increased by 61 kg of carbon per kg of nitrogen deposited, amounting to a 40% enhancement over pre-industrial conditions. Extrapolating to the globe, we estimate that nitrogen deposition could increase tree carbon storage by 0.31 Pg carbon yr−1.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    et al. in IPCC Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (eds Solomon, S. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  2. 2.

    et al. Nitrogen cycles: Past, present, and future. Biogeochemistry 70, 153–226 (2004).

  3. 3.

    & Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed. Ecology 89, 371–379 (2008).

  4. 4.

    & in The Major Biogeochemical Cycles and Their Interactions (eds Bolin, B. & Cook, R. B.) 177–222 (John Wiley & Sons, 1983).

  5. 5.

    & Nitrogen’s carbon bonus. Nature Geosci. 2, 318–319 (2009).

  6. 6.

    et al. The human footprint in the carbon cycle of temperate and boreal forests. Nature 447, 849–851 (2007).

  7. 7.

    et al. Ecologically implausible carbon response? Reply. Nature 451, E3–E4 (2008).

  8. 8.

    et al. Ecologically implausible carbon response? Nature 451, E1–E3 (2008).

  9. 9.

    et al. Uncertainties in the relationship between atmospheric nitrogen deposition and forest carbon sequestration. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 2057–2063 (2008).

  10. 10.

    et al. Global nitrogen deposition and carbon sinks. Nature Geosci. 1, 430–437 (2008).

  11. 11.

    et al. Variations in the predicted spatial distribution of atmospheric nitrogen deposition and their impact on carbon uptake by terrestrial ecosystems. J. Geophys. Res. 102, 15849–15866 (1997).

  12. 12.

    , , & Spatial and temporal patterns in terrestrial carbon storage due to deposition of fossil fuel nitrogen. Ecol. Appl. 6, 806–814 (1996).

  13. 13.

    , , & Influence of carbon-nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO2 fertilization and climate variability. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 21, GB4018 (2007).

  14. 14.

    et al. Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in US forests. Science 290, 1148–1151 (2000).

  15. 15.

    et al. Nitrogen deposition makes a minor contribution to carbon sequestration in temperate forests. Nature 398, 145–148 (1999).

  16. 16.

    et al. Impact of long-term nitrogen addition on carbon stocks in trees and soils in northern Europe. Biogeochemistry 89, 121–137 (2008).

  17. 17.

    et al. Ecosystem response to 15 years of chronic nitrogen additions at the Harvard Forest LTER, Massachusetts, USA. Forest Ecol. Management 196, 7–28 (2004).

  18. 18.

    , , & Effects of nitrogen saturation on tree growth and death in a mixed-oak forest. Forest Ecol. Manage. 243, 210–218 (2007).

  19. 19.

    , , & Interactive effects of nitrogen deposition, tropospheric ozone, elevated CO2 and land use history on the carbon dynamics of northern hardwood forests. Glob. Change Biol. 8, 545–562 (2002).

  20. 20.

    et al. Forest ecosystem responses to exotic pests and pathogens in eastern North America. Bioscience 56, 395–405 (2006).

  21. 21.

    & Physiology of organic nitrogen acquisition by ectomycorrhizal fungi and ectomycorrhizas. Fems Microbiol. Rev. 22, 21–44 (1998).

  22. 22.

    et al. Nitrogen saturation in temperate forest ecosystems—hypotheses revisited. Bioscience 48, 921–934 (1998).

  23. 23.

    , & Competition for light causes plant biodiversity loss after eutrophication. Science 324, 636–638 (2009).

  24. 24.

    et al. Analyses of the impact of changes in atmospheric deposition and climate on forest growth in European monitoring plots: A stand growth approach. Forest Ecol. Manage. 258, 1735–1750 (2009).

  25. 25.

    , & Growth enhancement due to global atmospheric change as predicted by terrestrial ecosystem models: Consistent with US forest inventory data. Glob. Change Biol. 8, 299–303 (2002).

  26. 26.

    et al. Forest response to elevated CO2 is conserved across a broad range of productivity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 18052–18056 (2005).

  27. 27.

    , , & National-scale biomass estimators for United States tree species. Forest Sci. 49, 12–35 (2003).

  28. 28.

    & The biosphere as an increasing sink for atmospheric carbon—estimates from increased nitrogen deposition. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 7, 717–733 (1993).

  29. 29.

    et al. Projecting the future of the US carbon sink. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 1389–1394 (2002).

  30. 30.

    & Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach 2nd edn (Springer, 2002).

Download references


This research was supported, in part, by a grant to C.D.C. from the US Department of Energy, National Institute for Climatic Change Research, a Marie Tharp Fellowship, Columbia University to K.C.W., NSF-DEB award #0614099 to C.L.G. and a Kieckhefer Adirondack Foundation grant to R.Q.T. We would like to thank staff from the US Forest Service FIA Program, particularly E. LaPoint, for making the FIA data available to us, and for their considerable help in compiling this particular data set. We also thank C. Carey, J. Caspersen, W. De Vries, F. Magnani, N. Mahowald and W. Schlesinger for suggestions and comments on the manuscript.

Author information


  1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson Hall, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

    • R. Quinn Thomas
    •  & Christine L. Goodale
  2. Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Box AB, Millbrook, New York, 12545, USA

    • Charles D. Canham
    •  & Kathleen C. Weathers


  1. Search for R. Quinn Thomas in:

  2. Search for Charles D. Canham in:

  3. Search for Kathleen C. Weathers in:

  4. Search for Christine L. Goodale in:


R.Q.T., C.D.C., K.C.W. and C.L.G. all contributed to the development of project ideas, design, analysis interpretation and to writing of the manuscript, with C.L.G. and R.Q.T. originating the project. In addition, C.D.C. and R.Q.T. assembled the FIA and climate data and carried out the statistical analyses, K.C.W. developed the N deposition estimates and C.L.G. and R.Q.T. provided the carbon framework.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Quinn Thomas.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

About this article

Publication history






Further reading