Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Forest annual carbon cost: reply

Forest annual carbon cost: reply Ecology, 92(10), 2011, pp. 1994–1998 Ó 2011 by the Ecological Society of America Forest annual carbon cost: comment BRIAN J. ENQUIST1,2,3 Understanding the relative influence of abiotic and biotic forces on ecosystem-level processes across broad scale remains a central question in global ecology (Schimel et al. 1996, Chapin et al. 1997, Kerkhoff et al. 2005). In their report, Piao et al. (2010) addressed how global-scale variation in annual terrestrial autotrophic respiration, Ra, varies across broad-scale gradients including temperature, biomass, and successionary age. In addition, they purported to test several predictions and observations from metabolic scaling theory, MST (West et al. 1997) on how temperature and autotrophic biomass influence rates of ecosystem metabolism and production (Enquist et al. 2007b). While I agree with Piao et al.’s emphasis on the need to assess variation in ecosystem processes across broad gradients, I question their methodology for comparing and standardizing rates of ecosystem production and disagree with their reading of MST. Issues of how to standardize flux measures in order to compare annual and instantaneous rates across sites are not just specific to Piao et al.’s study. These issues also apply to other studies assessing spatial variation in ecosystem metabolism across broad http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Ecology Ecological Society of America

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ecological-society-of-america/forest-annual-carbon-cost-reply-D0z2580cOv

References (9)

Publisher
Ecological Society of America
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by the Ecological Society of America
Subject
Comments
ISSN
0012-9658
DOI
10.1890/11-0785.1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Ecology, 92(10), 2011, pp. 1994–1998 Ó 2011 by the Ecological Society of America Forest annual carbon cost: comment BRIAN J. ENQUIST1,2,3 Understanding the relative influence of abiotic and biotic forces on ecosystem-level processes across broad scale remains a central question in global ecology (Schimel et al. 1996, Chapin et al. 1997, Kerkhoff et al. 2005). In their report, Piao et al. (2010) addressed how global-scale variation in annual terrestrial autotrophic respiration, Ra, varies across broad-scale gradients including temperature, biomass, and successionary age. In addition, they purported to test several predictions and observations from metabolic scaling theory, MST (West et al. 1997) on how temperature and autotrophic biomass influence rates of ecosystem metabolism and production (Enquist et al. 2007b). While I agree with Piao et al.’s emphasis on the need to assess variation in ecosystem processes across broad gradients, I question their methodology for comparing and standardizing rates of ecosystem production and disagree with their reading of MST. Issues of how to standardize flux measures in order to compare annual and instantaneous rates across sites are not just specific to Piao et al.’s study. These issues also apply to other studies assessing spatial variation in ecosystem metabolism across broad

Journal

EcologyEcological Society of America

Published: Oct 1, 2011

There are no references for this article.