HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (15) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fitzhugh, R. D. Articles by Hardy, J. P. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Fitzhugh, R. D. Articles by Hardy, J. P. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Fitzhugh, R. D. Articles by Hardy, J. P. Related Collections Biogeochemical Processes Global Change Frozen Soils

Soil Freezing and the Acid-Base Chemistry of Soil Solutions in a Northern Hardwood Forest

^a Dep. of Plant Biology, Univ. of Illinois, 505 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
^b Dep. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse Univ., 220 Hinds Hall, Syracuse, NY 13244
^c Institute of Ecosystem Studies, P.O. Box AB, Millbrook, NY 12545
^d Dep. of Natural Resources, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY 14853
^e Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, U.S. Army, Hanover, NH 03755

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Time series of (a) acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) values and (b) H+ concentrations for soil solutions draining the Oa horizon of reference and treatment plots in sugar maple stands. Soils in treatment plots were frozen from December through March. Error bars represent ±one standard error of the mean.

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Time series showing daily reference (solid lines) and treatment (dotted lines) soil temperatures averaged among all plots at (a) 10-, (b) 20-, (c) 30-, (d) 40-, and (e) 50-cm depth during the over-winter period. The dashed lines in each panel are references for 0°C.

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Time series of nitrate concentrations for soil solutions draining the Oa horizon of reference and treatment plots in (a) sugar maple and (b) yellow birch stands. Soils in treatment plots were frozen from December through March. Error bars represent ±one standard error of the mean.

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Time series of Ca2+ concentrations for soil solutions draining the Oa horizon of reference and treatment plots in (a) sugar maple and (b) yellow birch stands. Soils in treatment plots were frozen from December through March. Error bars represent ±one standard error of the mean. Note that the scales of the y-axes are different between panels (a) and (b).

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Time series of Mg2+ concentrations for soil solutions draining the Oa horizon of reference and treatment plots in (a) sugar maple and (b) yellow birch stands. Soils in treatment plots were frozen from December through March. Error bars represent ±one standard error of the mean. Note that the scales of the y-axes are different between panels (a) and (b).

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Soil solution Ca2+ as a function of (a) NO-3 and (b) dissolved organic C (DOC) concentrations in the Oa horizon of sugar maple stands. Linear regression results are: (a) reference: Ca2+ = 0.18 x NO-3 + 22, R2 = 0.09, p = 0.0019, n = 106; treatment: Ca2+ = 0.25 x NO-3 + 14, R2 = 0.90, p < 0.0001, n = 105; and (b) reference: Ca2+ = 0.018 x DOC + 9.6, R2 = 0.82, p < 0.0001, n = 102; treatment: Ca2+ = 0.035 x DOC + 9.5, R2 = 0.57, p < 0.0001, n = 101.

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Soil solution Mg2+ as a function of (a) NO-3 and (b) dissolved organic C (DOC) concentrations in the Oa horizon of sugar maple stands. Linear regression results are: (a) reference: Mg2+ = 0.033 x NO-3 + 6.9, R2 = 0.06, p = 0.011, n = 106; treatment: Mg2+ = 0.050 x NO-3 + 6.0, R2 = 0.85, p < 0.0001, n = 105; and (b) reference: Mg2+ = 0.0034 x DOC + 4.6, R2 = 0.64, p < 0.0001, n = 102; treatment: Mg2+ = 0.0059 x DOC + 5.8, R2 = 0.41, p < 0.0001, n = 101.

View larger version (43K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Time series of (a) dissolved organic C (DOC) and (b) organic anion (An-) concentrations for soil solutions draining the Oa horizon of reference and treatment plots in sugar maple stands. Soils in treatment plots were frozen from December through March. Error bars represent ±one standard error of the mean.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Soil solution ANC as a function of (a) NO-3 and (b) organic anion (An-) concentrations in the Oa horizon of sugar maple stands. Linear regression results are: (a) reference: ANC = -0.23 x NO-3 + 2.9, R2 = 0.10, p = 0.0028, n = 87; treatment: ANC = -0.43 x NO-3 + 3.9, R2 = 0.79, p < 0.0001, n = 82; and (b) reference: ANC = -0.057 x An- - 4.1, R2 = 0.042, p = 0.10, n = 65 (line not shown); treatment: ANC = -1.1 x An- - 4.6, R2 = 0.55, p < 0.0001, n = 71.

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Soil solution ANC as a function of (a) Ca2+, (b) Mg2+, and (c) K+ concentrations in the Oa horizon of sugar maple stands. Linear regression results are: (a) reference: ANC = -0.25 x Ca2+ + 1.8, R2 = 0.041, p = 0.06, n = 86 (line not shown); treatment: ANC = -1.8 x Ca2+ + 28, R2 = 0.84, p < 0.0001, n = 82; (b) reference: ANC = -0.58 x Mg2+ - 0.2, R2 = 0.0096, p = 0.37, n = 86 (line not shown); treatment: ANC = -7.4 x Mg2+ + 43, r2 = 0.68, p < 0.0001, n = 82; (c) reference: ANC = -0.20 x K+- 1.1, R2 = 0.028, p = 0.13, n = 86 (line not shown); treatment: ANC = -1.5 x K+ - 8.8, r2 = 0.40, p < 0.0001, n = 82.