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.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Boreal forest biomass accumulation is not increased by two decades of soil warming

Nature Climate Change volume 9, pages 49–52 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 23 November 2021

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 23 January 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Increased soil organic matter decomposition with increasing temperature has been hypothesized to enhance soil nitrogen availability, consequently stimulating forest biomass production and offsetting decomposition-induced soil carbon losses1,2,3,4,5. This projection, however, is based on evidence gathered from short-term studies (≤10 years)2,3,5. The key question for carbon sequestration is whether such responses are transient or persist over long forest rotation periods. Here we report on biomass production in a typical nitrogen-limited boreal Picea abies forest, exposed to 18 years of soil warming manipulation (+5 °C) at a plot scale (100 m2). We show that two decades of soil warming elicited only short-duration growth responses, thus not significantly increasing aboveground biomass accumulation. Furthermore, in combination with published work from this forest, our results suggest that increased decomposition is slight and ephemeral, and increased fine root production and turnover in deeper soil may be greater than increased decomposition, netting slightly more biomass, perhaps conserving the soil carbon stock. Thus, this long-term study does not support the notion that the projected increase in soil temperatures will cause either an increased carbon loss with decomposition or a compensatory growth increase from nitrogen mineralization.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: ANPPW and AWB.
Fig. 2: Synthesis of responses to soil warming.
Fig. 3: Nitrogen in foliage.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.

Change history

  • 23 January 2019

    In the version of the Supplementary Information file originally published with this Letter, ref. 42 — Andersson, P., Berggren, D. & Nilsson, I. Indices for nitrogen status and nitrate leaching from Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stands in Sweden. For. Ecol. Manag. 157, 39–53 (2002) — should have appeared as a footnote to Supplementary Table 2; this has now been added.

  • 23 November 2021

    A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01234-z

References

  1. Melillo, J. et al. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature363, 234–240 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jarvis, P. G. & Linder, S. Constraints to growth of boreal forests. Nature405, 904–905 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Strömgren, M. & Linder, S. Effects of nutrition and soil warming on stemwood production in a boreal Norway spruce stand. Global Change Biol.8, 1194–1204 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Melillo, J. et al. Soil warming and carbon-cycle feedbacks to the climate system. Science298, 2173–2176 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Melillo, J. et al. Soil warming, carbon–nitrogen interactions, and forest carbon budgets. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA108, 9508–9512 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jenkinson, D. S. et al. Model estimates of CO2 emissions from soil in response to global warming. Nature351, 304–306 (1991).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goulden, M. L. et al. Sensitivity of boreal forest carbon balance to soil thaw. Science279, 214–217 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bond-Lamberty, B. & Thomson, A. Temperature-associated increases in the global soil respiration record. Nature464, 579–582 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dixon, R. K. et al. Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science263, 185–190 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Schimel, D. S. et al. Recent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems. Nature414, 169–172 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tamm, C. O. Nitrogen in Terrestrial Ecosystems: Questions of Productivity, Vegetational Changes, and Ecosystem Stability Ecological Studies 81 (Springer, Berlin, 1991).

  12. Bergh, J., Linder, S. & Bergström, J. The effect of water and nutrient availability on the productivity of Norway spruce in northern and southern Sweden. For. Ecol. Manage.119, 51–62 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Savage, K. E. et al. Long-term changes in forest carbon under temperature and nitrogen amendments in a temperate northern hardwood forest. Glob. Change Biol.19, 2389–2400 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bradford, M. A. et al. Thermal adaptation of soil microbial respiration to elevated temperature. Ecol. Lett.11, 1316–1327 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Melillo, J. et al. Long-term pattern and magnitude of soil carbon feedback to the climate system in a warming world. Science358, 101–104 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bergh, J. & Linder, S. Effects of soil warming during spring on photosynthetic recovery in boreal Norway spruce stands. Glob. Change Biol.5, 245–253 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Linder, S. Foliar analysis for detecting and correcting nutrient imbalances in Norway spruce. Ecol. Bull.44, 178–190 (1995).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Högberg, P. Tansley review No. 95 15N natural abundance in soil-plant systems. New Phytol.137, 179–203 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Strömgren, M. Soil-Surface CO2Flux and Growth in a Boreal Norway Spruce Stand. PhD thesis, Swedish Univ. Agricultural Sciences (2001).

  20. Fröberg, M. et al. Long-term effects of experimental fertilization and soil warming on dissolved organic matter leaching from a spruce forest in Northern Sweden. Geoderma200, 172–179 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Leppälammi-Kujansuu, J. et al. Effects of long-term temperature and nutrient manipulation on Norway spruce fine roots and mycelia production. Plant Soil366, 287–303 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Olsson, P., Linder, S., Giesler, R. & Högberg, P. Fertilization of boreal forest reduces both autotrophic and heterotrophic soil respiration. Glob. Change Biol.11, 1745–1753 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Majdi, H. & Öhrvik, J. Interactive effects of soil warming and fertilization on root production, mortality, and longevity in a Norway spruce stand in Northern Sweden. Glob. Change Biol.10, 182–188 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Coucheney, E., Strömgren, M., Lerch, T. Z. & Herrmann, A. M. Long-term fertilization of a boreal Norway spruce forest increases the temperature sensitivity of soil organic carbon mineralization. Ecol. Evol.3, 5177–5188 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Leppälammi-Kujansuu, J., Salemaa, M., Kleja, D. B. & Linder, S. Fine root turnover and litter production of Norway spruce in a long-term temperature and nutrient manipulation experiment. Plant Soil374, 73–88 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Persson, H. in Nutrient Cycling in Terrestrial Ecosystems (eds Harrison, A. F., Ineson, P. & Heal, O. W.) 198–217 (Elsevier Applied Science, Barking, 1990).

  27. Carey, J. C. et al. Temperature response of soil respiration largely unaltered with experimental warming. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA113, 13797–13802 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Oren, R. et al. Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere. Nature411, 469–472 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Sigurdsson, B. D., Medhurst, J., Wallin, G., Eggertsson, O. & Linder, S. Growth of mature boreal Norway spruce was not affected by elevated [CO2] and/or air temperature unless nutrient availability was improved. Tree Physiol.33, 1192–1205 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hägglund, B. & Lundmark, J.-E. Site index estimation by means of site properties of Scots pine and Norway spruce in Sweden. Stud. For. Suec.138, 1–33 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sjörs, H. The background: geology, climate and zonation. Acta Phytogeogr. Suec.84, 5–14 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lim, H. et al. Inter-annual variability of precipitation constrains the production response of boreal Pinus sylvestris to nitrogen fertilization. For. Ecol. Manage.348, 31–45 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Petersson, H. & Ståhl, G. Functions for below-ground biomass of Pinus sylvestris, Picea abies, Betula pendula and Betula pubescens in Sweden. Scand. J. For. Res.21, 84–93 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lim, H. et al. Annual climate variation modifies nitrogen induced carbon accumulation of Pinus sylvestris forests. Ecol. Appl.27, 1838–1851 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Thomas, C. T. & Martin, A. R. Carbon content of tree tissues: a synthesis. Forests3, 332–352 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Flower-Ellis, J. G. K. Dry-matter allocation in Norway spruce branches: a demographic approach. Stud. For. Suec.191, 51–73 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ohlsson, K. E. A. & Wallmark, P. H. Novel calibration with correction for drift and non-linear response for continuous flow isotope ratio mass spectrometry applied to the determination of δ15N, total nitrogen, δ13C and total carbon in biological material. Analyst124, 571–577 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Reineke, L. H. Perfecting a stand-density index for even-aged forests. J. Agric. Res.46, 627–638 (1933).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Binkley, D., Stape, J. L., Bauerle, W. L. & Ryan, M. G. Explaining growth of individual trees: light interception and efficiency of light use by Eucalyptus at four sites in Brazil. For. Ecol. Manage.259, 1704–1713 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pommerening, A. & Muszta, A. Relative plant growth revisited: towards a mathematical standardisation of separate approaches. Ecol. Model.320, 383–392 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Waring, R. H. Estimating forest growth and efficiency in relation to canopy leaf-area. Adv. Ecol. Res.13, 327–354 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study received support from the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (MISTRA), the Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA), The Swedish Council of Forestry and Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (FORMAS) and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (no. 2015.0047). Financial support for R.O. was provided by the Erkko Visiting Professor Programme, through the University of Helsinki. We especially thank Svartberget Field Station for providing staff for fieldwork.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forest Ecology and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Umeå, Sweden

    Hyungwoo Lim, Torgny Näsholm, Tomas Lundmark & Harald Grip

  2. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Ram Oren

  3. Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Ram Oren

  4. Department of Soil and Environment, SLU, Uppsala, Sweden

    Monika Strömgren

  5. Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, SLU, Alnarp, Sweden

    Sune Linder

Authors
  1. Hyungwoo Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ram Oren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Torgny Näsholm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Monika Strömgren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tomas Lundmark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Harald Grip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sune Linder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.L. established the experiment in 1994, and designed the present study together with H.L, T.N. and R.O. H.G. collected and analysed the water from the lysimeters. H.L. performed all of the final fieldwork. H.L. and R.O. processed the data, crafted the argument and wrote the paper with input from T.N., S.L., M.S. and T.L. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript at all stages.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hyungwoo Lim or Ram Oren.

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 1–2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lim, H., Oren, R., Näsholm, T. et al. Boreal forest biomass accumulation is not increased by two decades of soil warming. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 49–52 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0373-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0373-9

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced 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