Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2022-236
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2022-236
12 Jan 2023
 | 12 Jan 2023
Status: this preprint was under review for the journal BG but the revision was not accepted.

Ideas and perspectives: Errors associated with the gross nitrification rates in forested catchments calculated from the triple oxygen isotopic composition (Δ17O) of stream nitrate

Weitian Ding, Urumu Tsunogai, and Fumiko Nakagawa

Abstract. A novel method to quantify the gross nitrification rate (GNR) in each forested catchment using the triple oxygen isotopic composition (Δ17O) of stream nitrate eluted from the catchment has been proposed and used in recent studies. However, the equations used in the calculations assumed homogeneous Δ17O values of nitrate being metabolized through either assimilation or denitrification within the forested soil layers without particular discussions. The GNR estimated from the Δ17O of stream nitrate using the equations was more than six times the actual GNR in our simulated calculation for a forested catchment where the Δ17O values of nitrate being metabolized in the soil were heterogeneous and showed a decreasing trend with increasing depths. Therefore, we should verify that the Δ17O values of nitrate being metabolized are homogeneous in forested soils or estimate the possible range of errors using Δ17O of stream nitrate to estimate the GNR.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Weitian Ding, Urumu Tsunogai, and Fumiko Nakagawa

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on bg-2022-236', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Feb 2023
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Weitian Ding, 12 Mar 2023
  • RC2: 'Comment on bg-2022-236', Joel Bostic, 10 Feb 2023
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Weitian Ding, 12 Mar 2023

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on bg-2022-236', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Feb 2023
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Weitian Ding, 12 Mar 2023
  • RC2: 'Comment on bg-2022-236', Joel Bostic, 10 Feb 2023
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Weitian Ding, 12 Mar 2023
Weitian Ding, Urumu Tsunogai, and Fumiko Nakagawa
Weitian Ding, Urumu Tsunogai, and Fumiko Nakagawa

Viewed

Total article views: 935 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
698 185 52 935 88 43 48
  • HTML: 698
  • PDF: 185
  • XML: 52
  • Total: 935
  • Supplement: 88
  • BibTeX: 43
  • EndNote: 48
Views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jan 2023)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jan 2023)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 930 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 930 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 08 Dec 2024
Download
Short summary
Past studies used the Δ17O of stream nitrate to estimate GNR in each forested catchment. However, the GNR estimated from the Δ17O of stream nitrate using the equations was more than six times the actual GNR in our simulated calculation for a forested catchment. As a result, it must be essential to clarify/verify the distribution of the Δ17O values of NO3 in forested soils before applying the Δ17O values of stream NO3 to estimate GNR.
Altmetrics