Liu Huanhuan, Miao Yuqi, Chen Yu, Shen Yifan, You Yongfa, Wang Zhuonan, Gang Chengcheng
College of Grassland Agriculture, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, China; Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
College of Grassland Agriculture, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, China.
Sci Total Environ. 2025 Mar 1;967:178773. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.178773. Epub 2025 Feb 13.
Land management practices significantly influence soil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Despite individual measurements of the impacts of forest and grassland ecosystem management practices (FGEM) on GHG emissions, a comprehensive global-scale synthesis and comparison remain absent. In this study, a global meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the responses of three key soil GHGs, including carbon dioxide (CO), methane (CH), and nitrous oxide (NO), to various FGEM, including forest burning (FB) and thinning (FT), grassland grazing (GG), fencing (GF), and mowing (GM) based on 1643 observations from 317 individual studies. Moderator factors and the underlying mechanisms driving these responses were also explored. Results revealed that in managed forests, FB significantly reduced soil CO and NO emissions, while FT decreased soil CH uptake capacity without affecting CO and NO emissions. In managed grasslands, GG reduced soil CO emission, while GF increased it; both had neutral impacts on soil CH and NO fluxes. GM did not affect GHG fluxes. Overall, forest management decreased soil CO emission and CH uptake capacity, whereas grassland management had a neutral effect on soil GHG fluxes. Temporal analysis revealed diminishing effects of FGEM on CO emissions over the long term. Soil CH uptake exhibited divergent responses over time, and soil NO emissions remained relatively constant. Compared to managed grassland, soil GHG fluxes in managed forests were more sensitive to aridity conditions, with forest management generally restraining soil CO and NO emissions and CH uptake in humid regions. Meta-regression analysis highlighted carbon content, soil temperature, and soil moisture as primary drives of changes in soil CO and CH fluxes, while soil NO fluxes were more susceptible to soil organic carbon and microbial biomass nitrogen. The dependence of soil GHG fluxes on climate zones and management duration should be integrated into Earth system models for more accurate predictions of the impact of human interference.
土地管理实践对土壤温室气体（GHG）排放有显著影响。尽管已经对森林和草地生态系统管理实践（FGEM）对温室气体排放的影响进行了个别测量，但仍缺乏全面的全球尺度综合分析和比较。在本研究中，基于来自317项独立研究的1643条观测数据，进行了一项全球荟萃分析，以分析三种关键土壤温室气体，包括二氧化碳（CO）、甲烷（CH）和一氧化二氮（NO），对各种FGEM的响应，这些FGEM包括森林燃烧（FB）、间伐（FT）、草地放牧（GG）、围栏（GF）和割草（GM）。还探讨了调节因素以及驱动这些响应的潜在机制。结果表明，在人工林中，FB显著降低了土壤CO和NO排放，而FT降低了土壤CH吸收能力，但不影响CO和NO排放。在人工草地中，GG降低了土壤CO排放，而GF增加了土壤CO排放；两者对土壤CH和NO通量均无显著影响。GM对温室气体通量没有影响。总体而言，森林管理降低了土壤CO排放和CH吸收能力，而草地管理对土壤温室气体通量具有中性影响。时间分析表明，从长期来看，FGEM对CO排放的影响逐渐减弱。土壤CH吸收随时间呈现出不同的响应，而土壤NO排放保持相对稳定。与人工草地相比，人工林中的土壤温室气体通量对干旱条件更为敏感，森林管理通常会抑制湿润地区的土壤CO和NO排放以及CH吸收。荟萃回归分析强调，碳含量、土壤温度和土壤湿度是土壤CO和CH通量变化的主要驱动因素，而土壤NO通量更容易受到土壤有机碳和微生物生物量氮的影响。土壤温室气体通量对气候区和管理持续时间的依赖性应纳入地球系统模型，以便更准确地预测人类干扰的影响。
