Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Latitudinal limits to the predicted increase of the peatland carbon sink with warming

Abstract

The carbon sink potential of peatlands depends on the balance of carbon uptake by plants and microbial decomposition. The rates of both these processes will increase with warming but it remains unclear which will dominate the global peatland response. Here we examine the global relationship between peatland carbon accumulation rates during the last millennium and planetary-scale climate space. A positive relationship is found between carbon accumulation and cumulative photosynthetically active radiation during the growing season for mid- to high-latitude peatlands in both hemispheres. However, this relationship reverses at lower latitudes, suggesting that carbon accumulation is lower under the warmest climate regimes. Projections under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP)2.6 and RCP8.5 scenarios indicate that the present-day global sink will increase slightly until around ad 2100 but decline thereafter. Peatlands will remain a carbon sink in the future, but their response to warming switches from a negative to a positive climate feedback (decreased carbon sink with warming) at the end of the twenty-first century.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Distribution of sampling sites in geographical space.
Fig. 2: Controls on peat accumulation rate.
Fig. 3: Spatial analysis of the overall carbon sink.
Fig. 4: Projected anomalies (future − historic) of annual carbon accumulation rates for four time periods.

Data availability

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available in the Supplementary Information and from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

References

  1. 1.

    Friedlingstein, P. et al. Climate–carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4MIP model intercomparison. J. Clim. 19, 3337–3353 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Gregory, J. M., Jones, C. D., Cadule, P. & Friedlingstein, P. Quantifying carbon cycle feedbacks. J. Clim. 22, 5232–5250 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Matthews, H. D., Eby, M., Ewen, T., Friedlingstein, P. & Hawkins, B. J. What determines the magnitude of carbon cycle–climate feedbacks? Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 21, GB2012 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Yu, Z. C., Loisel, J., Brosseau, D. P., Beilman, D. W. & Hunt, S. J. Global peatland dynamics since the Last Glacial Maximum. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L13402 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Spahni, R., Joos, F., Stocker, B. D., Steinacher, M. & Yu, Z. C. Transient simulations of the carbon and nitrogen dynamics in northern peatlands: from the Last Glacial Maximum to the 21st century. Clim. Past 9, 1287–1308 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Chaudhary, N., Miller, P. A. & Smith, B. Modelling Holocene peatland dynamics with an individual-based dynamic vegetation model. Biogeosciences 14, 2571–2596 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Ise, T., Dunn, A. L., Wofsy, S. C. & Moorcroft, P. R. High sensitivity of peat decomposition to climate change through water-table feedback. Nat. Geosci. 1, 763–766 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Dorrepaal, E. et al. Carbon respiration from subsurface peat accelerated by climate warming in the subarctic. Nature 460, 616–619 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Wilson, R. M. et al. Stability of peatland carbon to rising temperatures. Nat. Commun. 7, 13723 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Blodau, C., Siems, M. & Beer, J. Experimental burial inhibits methanogenesis and anaerobic decomposition in water-saturated peats. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 9984–9989 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Loisel, J. et al. A database and synthesis of northern peatland soil properties and Holocene carbon and nitrogen accumulation. Holocene 24, 1028–1042 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Charman, D. J. et al. Climate-related changes in peatland carbon accumulation during the last millennium. Biogeosciences 10, 929–944 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Yu, Z. Holocene carbon flux histories of the world’s peatlands: global carbon cycle implications. Holocene 21, 761–774 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Dargie, G. C. et al. Age, extent and carbon storage of the central Congo Basin peatland complex. Nature 542, 86–90 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Michaletz, S. T., Cheng, D., Kerkhoff, A. J. & Enquist, B. J. Convergence of terrestrial plant production across global climate gradients. Nature 512, 39–43 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Wang, H. et al. Towards a universal model for carbon dioxide uptake by plants. Nat. Plants 3, 734–741 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Jones, C. et al. Twenty-first-century compatible CO2 emissions and airborne fraction simulated by CMIP5 Earth System models under four Representative Concentration Pathways. J. Clim. 26, 4398–4413 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Gorham, E. Northern peatlands: role in the carbon cycle and probable responses to climatic warming. Ecol. Appl. 1, 182–195 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Korhola, A., Alm, J., Tolonen, K., Turunen, J. & Jungner, H. Three-dimensional reconstruction of carbon accumulation and CH4 emission during nine millenia in a raised mire. J. Quat. Sci. 11, 161–165 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Väliranta, M. et al. Holocene fen–bog transitions, current status in Finland and future perspectives. Holocene 27, 752–764 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Cooper, M. D. A. et al. Limited contribution of permafrost carbon to methane release from thawing peatlands. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 507–511 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Jones, M. C. et al. Rapid carbon loss and slow recovery following permafrost thaw in boreal peatlands. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 1109–1127 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Ott, C. A. & Chimner, R. A. Long-term peat accumulation in temperate forested peatlands (Thuja occidentalis swamps) in the Great Lakes region of North America. Mires Peat 18, 1–9 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Wang, H., Richardson, C. J., & Ho, M. Dual controls on carbon loss during drought in peatlands. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 584–587 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Page, S. E. et al. The amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420, 61–65 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Moore, S. et al. Deep instability of deforested tropical peatlands revealed by fluvial organic carbon fluxes. Nature 493, 660–663 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Cressie, N. A. C. Statistics for Spatial Data (John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, 1993).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Bol, R. A., Harkness, D. D., Huang, Y. & Howard, D. M. The influence of soil processes on carbon isotope distribution and turnover in the British uplands. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 50, 41–51 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    New, M., Hulme, M. & Jones, P. D. Representing twentieth century space–time climate variability. Part 1: development of a 1961–90 mean monthly terrestrial climatology. J. Clim. 12, 829–856 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Gallego-Sala, A. V., & Prentice, I. C. Blanket peat biome endangered by climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 152–155 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Diggle, P. & Riberio, P. J. Jr. Model-based Geostatistics (Springer, New York, 2007).

  32. 32.

    Goovaerts, P. Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1997).

  33. 33.

    Pebesma, E. J. Multivariable geostatistics in S: the gstat package. Comput. Geosci. 30, 683–691 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Hijmans, R. J. et al. Raster: geographic analysis and modeling with raster data. R package v.2.5-8. (CRAN, 2016); https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/raster/index.html

  35. 35.

    IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer L. A.) (IPCC, 2014).

  36. 36.

    Jones, C. D. et al. The HadGEM2-ES implementation of CMIP5 centennial simulations. Geosci. Model Dev. 4, 543–570 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Collins, W. J. et al. Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model – HadGEM2. Geosci. Model Dev. 4, 1051–1075 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work presented in this paper was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC standard grant number NE/I012915/1) to D.J.C., A.G.S., I.C.P., S.P. and P.F., supported by NERC Radiocarbon Allocation 1681.1012. The work and ideas in this paper have also been supported by PAGES funding, as part of C-PEAT. C.D.J. was supported by the Joint UK DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). This research is also a contribution to the AXA Chair Programme in Biosphere and Climate Impacts and the Imperial College initiative on Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment. This research was also supported by a grant from the National Science Centre, Poland 2015/17/B/ST10/01656. We thank D. Vitt, J. Alm, I. E. Bauer, N. Rausch, V. Beaulieu-Audy, L. Tremblay, S. Pratte, A. Lamarre, D. Anderson and A. Ireland for contributing data to this compilation, S. Frolking for suggestions on different moisture indexes, and A. Whittle and F. Dearden for their work in the Exeter laboratories.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

A.G.S. carried out analysis and interpretation of the data and wrote the first draft of the paper. D.J.C. supervised the project and contributed to experimental design, interpretation of results and the final draft. S.Br. carried out the statistical and spatial analysis of the data and contributed to the design of the final figures. S.M. was responsible for new radiocarbon analyses. Z.Y. provided the peatland map used in the modelling and contributed data and materials. C.J. provided climate and gross primary productivity data. L.O. carried out the age-depth models for all cores. All authors contributed either data or materials to be analysed in the Geography laboratories at the University of Exeter. All authors contributed to the preparation of the final paper.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Angela V. Gallego-Sala or Dan J. Charman.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–3, Supplementary Figures 1–5 and Supplementary References.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gallego-Sala, A.V., Charman, D.J., Brewer, S. et al. Latitudinal limits to the predicted increase of the peatland carbon sink with warming. Nature Clim Change 8, 907–913 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0271-1

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing