SSSAJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yu, K.
Right arrow Articles by Patrick, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Yu, K.
Right arrow Articles by Patrick, W. H., Jr.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Yu, K.
Right arrow Articles by Patrick, W. H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Redox Processes
Right arrow Air Pollution
Right arrow Wetland Soils

Redox Window with Minimum Global Warming Potential Contribution from Rice Soils

Kewei Yu* and William H. Patrick, Jr.

Wetland Biogeochemistry Institute, Louisiana State Univ., Baton Rouge, LA 70803



View larger version (32K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Changes in pH and EH during the incubation. Soil pH was based on a single measurement each time. Soil EH was based on duplicate measurements, but standard deviations were not included in the figure for clarity.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Global warming potential (GWP) contribution of N2O, CH4, and CO2 as a function of soil EH. All eight soils showed the same pattern of (i) N2O, (ii) CH4, and (iii) CO2 dynamics with soil EH change from high to low. The figure was plotted in a logarithmic scale to cover a wide range of values. Global warming potential contributions below 1 mg CO2 equivalent kg–1 h–1 were considered insignificant and not illustrated in the figure for clarity.

 


View larger version (12K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Duration of soil in the EH range (+180 > EH > –150 mV) during the incubation. Values in each bar represent the time (in days) that each soil remained in the above EH range. Lower end of the bar represented the time when an individual soil EH decreased below +180 mV, and upper end of the bar represented the time when the soil EH decreased below –150 mV.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. Dynamics of soluble Mn, Fe, and sulfate during progressive reduction.

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality		 The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2004 by the Soil Science Society of America.