 |
| Titel |
Impact of rapeseed cropping on the soil carbon balance |
| VerfasserIn |
Antje Maria Moffat, Mathias Herbst, Vytas Huth, Monique Andres, Jürgen Augustin |
| Konferenz |
EGU General Assembly 2015
|
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| Digitales Dokument |
PDF |
| Erschienen |
In: GRA - Volume 17 (2015) |
| Datensatznummer |
250111437
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 EGU/EGU2015-11548.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Winter oilseed rape is the dominant biofuel crop in the young moraine landscape in Northern
Germany. Since the cultivation of biofuel crops requires sustainability compared to fossil
fuels by law, detailed knowledge about their green house gas (GHG) balance is necessary.
The soil carbon balance is one of the key contributors to the total GHG balance and also
very important for the assessment of soil fertility. However, the knowledge about
the impact of different management practices on the soil carbon balance is very
limited up to now. Therefore, we investigated the carbon fluxes of winter oilseed rape
at field plots near Dedelow/Uckermark in NE Germany with different treatments
of fertilization (mineral versus organic) and tillage (no-till and mulch-till versus
ploughing).
The dynamics of the carbon fluxes are mainly driven by the current climatic conditions but
the overall response depends strongly on the ecosystem state (with its physiological and
microbiological properties) which is affected by management. To get the full carbon flux
dynamics but also the impact of the different management practices, two different approaches
were used: The eddy covariance technique to get continuous fluxes throughout the year and
the manual chamber technique to detect flux differences between specific management
practices. The manual chamber measurements were conducted four-weekly as all-day
campaigns using a flow-through non-steady-state closed chamber system. The fluxes
in-between campaigns were gap-filled based on functional relationships with soil and air
temperature (for the ecosystem respiration) and photosynthetic active radiation (for the gross
primary production).
All results presented refer to the cropping season 2012–2013. The combination of the
two measurement techniques allows the evaluation of chamber fluxes including an
independent estimate of the error on the overall balances. Despite the considerable errors,
there are significant differences in the soil carbon balance between the tillage and
fertilization treatments - ranging from net losses to net gains in the soil carbon
stock. |
|
|
|
|
|
|