Carbon / nitrogen interactions in European forests and semi-natural vegetation. Part I: Fluxes and budgets of carbon, nitrogen and greenhouse gases from ecosystem monitoring and modelling
Authors: Flechard Chris R. , Ibrom Andreas , Skiba Ute M. , de Vries Wim , van Oijen Marcel , Cameron David R. , Dise Nancy B. , Korhonen Janne F. J. , Buchmann Nina , Legout Arnaud , Simpson David , Sanz Maria J. , Aubinet Marc , Loustau Denis , Montagnani Leonardo , Neirynck Johan , Janssens Ivan A. , Pihlatie Mari , Kiese Ralf , Siemens Jan , Francez André-Jean , Augustin Jürgen , Varlagin Andrej , Olejnik Janusz , Juszczak Radosław , Aurela Mika , Chojnicki Bogdan H. , Dämmgen Ulrich , Djuricic Vesna , Drewer Julia , Eugster Werner , Fauvel Yannick , Fowler David , Frumau Arnoud , Granier André , Gross Patrick , Hamon Yannick , Helfter Carole , Hensen Arjan , Horváth László , Kitzler Barbara , Kruijt Bart , Kutsch Werner L. , Lobo-do-Vale Raquel , Lohila Annalea , Longdoz Bernard , Marek Michal V. , Matteucci Giorgio , Mitosinkova Marta , Moreaux Virginie , Neftel Albrecht , Ourcival Jean-Marc , Pilegaard Kim , Pita Gabriel , Sanz Francisco , Schjoerring Jan K. , Sebastià Maria-Teresa , Tang Y. Sim , Uggerud Hilde , Urbaniak Marek , van Dijk Netty , Vesala Timo , Vidic Sonja , Vincke Caroline , Weidinger Tamás , Zechmeister-Boltenstern Sophie , Butterbach-Bahl Klaus , Nemitz Eiko , Sutton Mark A. 
Published: September 2019

Abstract. The impact of atmospheric reactive nitrogen (Nr) deposition on carbon (C) sequestration in soils and biomass of unfertilised, natural, semi-natural and forest ecosystems has been much debated. Many previous results of this dC / dN response were based on changes in carbon stocks from periodical soil and ecosystem inventories, associated with estimates of Nr deposition obtained from large-scale chemical transport models. This study and a companion paper (Flechard et al., 2019) strive to reduce uncertainties of N effects on C sequestration by linking multi-annual gross and net ecosystem productivity estimates from 40 eddy covariance flux towers across Europe to local measurement-based estimates of dry and wet Nr deposition from a dedicated collocated monitoring network. To identify possible ecological drivers and processes affecting the interplay between C and Nr inputs and losses, these data were also combined with in situ flux measurements of NO, N2O and CH4 fluxes, soil NO3− leaching sampling, as well as results of soil incubation experiments for N and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, surveys of available data from online databases and from the literature, together with forest ecosystem (BASFOR) modelling. Multi-year averages of net ecosystem productivity (NEP) in forests ranged from −70 to 826 g (C) m−2 yr−1 at total wet + dry inorganic Nr deposition rates (Ndep) of 0.3 to 4.3 g (N) m−2 yr−1; and from −4 to 361 g (C) m−2 yr−1 at Ndep rates of 0.1 to 3.1 g (N) m−2 yr−1 in short semi-natural vegetation (moorlands, wetlands and unfertilised extensively managed grasslands). The GHG budgets of the forests were strongly dominated by CO2 exchange, while CH4 and N2O exchange comprised a larger proportion of the GHG balance in short semi-natural vegetation. Nitrogen losses in the form of NO, N2O and especially NO3− were of the order of 10–20 % of Ndep at sites with Ndep  3 g (N) m−2 yr−1, indicating that perhaps one third of the sites were in a state of early to advanced N saturation. Net ecosystem productivity increased with Nr deposition up to 2–2.5 g (N) m−2 yr−1, with large scatter associated with a wide range in carbon sequestration efficiency (CSE, defined as the NEP / GPP ratio). At elevated Ndep levels (> 2.5 g (N) m−2 yr−1), where inorganic Nr losses were also increasingly large, NEP levelled off and then decreased. The apparent increase in NEP at low to intermediate Ndep levels was partly the result of geographical cross-correlations between Ndep and climate, indicating that the actual mean dC / dN response at individual sites was significantly lower than would be suggested by a simple, straightforward regression of NEP vs. Ndep.