Next Article in Journal
Dynamics of Bacterial Community Abundance and Structure in Horizontal Subsurface Flow Wetland Mesocosms Treating Municipal Wastewater
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessment of the Latest GPM-Era High-Resolution Satellite Precipitation Products by Comparison with Observation Gauge Data over the Chinese Mainland
Previous Article in Journal
Climate Change Will Make Recovery from Eutrophication More Difficult in Shallow Danish Lake Søbygaard
Previous Article in Special Issue
Assessment of Shallow Groundwater Recharge from Extreme Rainfalls in the Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China

Water 2016, 8(10), 460; https://doi.org/10.3390/w8100460

Review
Drought and Carbon Cycling of Grassland Ecosystems under Global Change: A Review
1
State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, Beijing 100038, China
2
China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research (IWHR), Beijing 100038, China
3
Department of Geography/CGCEO, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Academic Editor: Y. Jun Xu
Received: 1 May 2016 / Accepted: 7 October 2016 / Published: 17 October 2016

Abstract

:
In recent years, the increased intensity and duration of droughts have dramatically altered the structure and function of grassland ecosystems, which have been forced to adapt to this change in climate. Combinations of global change drivers such as elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration, warming, nitrogen (N) deposition, grazing, and land-use change have influenced the impact that droughts have on grassland C cycling. This influence, to some extent, can modify the relationship between droughts and grassland carbon (C) cycling in the multi-factor world. Unfortunately, prior reviews have been primarily anecdotal from the 1930s to the 2010s. We investigated the current state of the study on the interactive impacts of multiple factors under drought scenarios in grassland C cycling and provided scientific advice for dealing with droughts and managing grassland C cycling in a multi-factor world. Currently, adequate information is not available on the interaction between droughts and global change drivers, which would advance our understanding of grassland C cycling responses. It was determined that future experiments and models should specifically test how droughts regulate grassland C cycling under global changes. Previous multi-factor experiments of current and future global change conditions have studied various drought scenarios poorly, including changes in precipitation frequency and amplitude, timing, and interactions with other global change drivers. Multi-factor experiments have contributed to quantifying these potential changes and have provided important information on how water affects ecosystem processes under global change. There is an urgent need to establish a systematic framework that can assess ecosystem dynamic responses to droughts under current and future global change and human activity, with a focus on the combined effects of droughts, global change drivers, and the corresponding hierarchical responses of an ecosystem.
Keywords:
water stress; carbon sequestration; grassland; global change drivers; ecosystem function

1. Introduction

Grasslands cover around 40% of the global land surface and a large fraction of their biomass is below ground [1]. Therefore, grassland soils hold relatively large quantities of organic C and store around 28%–37% of the global soil organic C pool [2]. Grasslands are net sinks for the atmosphere, collecting nearly 0.5 PgC per year [3,4]. Grasslands have an irreplaceable role, as their contribution to climate change mitigation and adaptation improves land and ecosystem health, resilience, biological diversity regimes, global productivity, and water cycles under future climate scenarios [5]. However, they are also projected to be among the most sensitive ecosystems to drought [6]. Therefore, research on grassland response to drought is of great significance. A comprehensive understanding of these responses would provide significant information to be used in drought mitigation policies and carbon management programs.
There is evidence that droughts have continued escalating on a global scale [7], influencing key ecosystem processes and functions [8]. Simultaneously, extreme climatic events such as droughts are predicted to become more intense, more frequent, and longer lasting in arid and semi-arid regions [7,9]. Droughts could fundamentally alter the composition, structure, and function of grassland ecosystems, posing a far stronger threat to ecosystem functionality than global trends and shifts in average regimes [10,11]. Moreover, while global change drivers such as elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration, warming, N deposition, grazing, and other land-use changes are outside of the grassland ecosystems, they impose chronic, cumulative, and moderate stresses. Extreme events such as droughts, however, often lead to periodic, pulsing, and severe alterations [12]. Long-term declines in grassland productivity had been driven by increased dryness over four decades; to some extent, the water use efficiency that increased through CO2 enrichment in grasslands may have slightly moderated the decline in production of native C3 grasslands, while variations in N had no effects [13]. So it seems that extreme droughts may change the structure, composition, and functionality of terrestrial ecosystems, thereby influencing C cycling and its feedback to the climate system [14,15,16].
Droughts may affect C cycling under the influence of global change drivers. However, a full understanding of drought impact on carbon dynamics has not yet been achieved in climate impact research on grasslands. It is not clear whether a combination of drought and global change drivers affect grassland C cycling. In this review, however, we found that the relation between drought-derived water stresses imposed on grassland plants is indeed affected by multiple factors and, consequently, changes grassland C cycling [17,18].

2. Drought and Grassland C Cycling under Global Change

2.1. Overview

In this paper, drought is defined as water stress for plants and includes natural and human-manipulated droughts. The predominant vegetation of grasslands, including the Eurasian steppes, prairies, rangelands, or savannas, is grass [19]. The C sequestration and cycling in grasslands include C sequestration, allocation, turnover, emissions, and storage, such as GPP (gross primary productivity), NPP (net primary productivity), soil respiration, and SOC (soil organic carbon). The biomass of grasslands is allocated largely below ground with a large root to shoot ratio, which slows decomposition and weathering rates where significant accumulations of SOM (soil organic matter) and highly fertile soils were present [20]. Currently, grasslands possess about 12% of global SOM [21]. The belowground system can play an important role in controlling terrestrial C sequestration and cycling.
Grassland may be exceedingly vulnerable to droughts [10], which may result in shifts in the magnitude and patterns of C cycling [22]. In addition, effects from other changing parameters may interact with drought and grassland C cycling, such as elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, N deposition, grazing, other land-use change, and grassland ecosystem components (Figure 1) [23]. C cycling may mitigate or exacerbate climate change, depending upon the relative responses of grassland C sequestration and emissions to global change factors and droughts.

2.2. Drought and Grassland C Cycling

Water is a limiting factor in grasslands, many of which experience periodic droughts [10,24]. On a global scale, the frequency, duration, and intensity of droughts have increased strongly in recent decades [25], especially in arid and semi-arid regions [7]. Droughts are the main source of inter-annual variation in terrestrial C sequestration, as they cause large reductions in GPP as well as in the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of terrestrial ecosystems [26,27]. Droughts also have negative effects on soil biodiversity, the content of SOM, and water retention [28]; they may have implications on ecosystem functions that last longer than the drought itself [29,30]. Most notably, the ecosystem C sequestration accumulated over a number of years could be undone by a single severe drought [26,31]. When severe droughts occur, soil microbes struggling for ‘food’ resources eat into the ‘old’ soil C accumulated over a number of years in grasslands [32]. Additionally, under future climate scenarios, productivity is predicted to increase in North American grasslands despite rising aridity [33]. Therefore, droughts are key determinants of C cycling in grassland ecosystems, as they alter water provision and use [34,35].
C cycling has different responses to various drought intensities, as is supported by many studies [36,37,38]. Depending on their intensity, frequency, duration, and timing, not all droughts have an equal impact on grassland C cycling [39]. Drought intensity partly determines the fate of C allocation for photosynthate in grassland plants [40]. However, extreme drought limited C translocation from aboveground to belowground storage, while a moderate drought provoked allocation, assigning C translocation to the area of the plant where it was most urgently needed at high water stress [41]. In another study, soil CO2 flux decreased by 8% under reduced rainfall amounts, by 13% under altered rainfall timing, and by 20% when both were combined [42]. Thus, it was suggested that drought timing was a factor more critical than intensity in affecting C dynamics in semi-arid regions [43,44,45]. Similarly, the developmental stage of a plant could be determined by a response to drought [46]. Seedlings are known to be highly susceptible to drought stress [47]. A shift in spring drought impacts the structure and function of grasslands more than a drought in summer/fall for the North American Great Plains [48].
Furthermore, drought has mixed effects on grassland ecosystem processes. In the short term, drought adversely affects root biomass, litter decomposition rates, and short-term CO2 fluxes, but increases soil nutrient retention, soil fertility, and longer term C fixation rates [49]. In addition, droughts may have different impacts on aboveground and belowground productivity or communities [50]. Aboveground organisms grow fast, are more susceptible to drought, and have a quicker recovery rate post-drought, while belowground organisms grow slowly, do not easily suffer from drought, and have slower recovery rates post-drought [51]. Also, plant belowground inputs can affect the recovery of belowground communities after drought [52]. Drought may change plants and soil microorganisms by altering the C transfer process at the plant–microbial interface [53,54]. Drought can also change contemporary rates of biogeochemical processes by inducing a shift of abiotic drivers and microbial community structure [40,55].
In hostile environments, droughts can cause the functional thresholds of an ecosystem to shift rapidly, changing a C sink to a source [56,57,58] or reducing resiliency to pests, fires, and disease [59]. In the future, increases in the frequency and intensity of droughts could turn temperate grasslands from C sinks into sources, with positive C-climate feedback [60]. In fact, ecosystems suffer from the effects of a single event by switching into alternative ecological regimes and cannot withstand the combination of multiple extreme events [61]. Grassland ecosystems are able to withstand moderate drought and maintain ecosystem functions [38,62], but severe, extended droughts may induce catastrophic consequences, such as the 1930s Dust Bowl in North America [12,63]. Droughts can significantly and divergently alter the resilience to new disturbances, such as insects, disease, or the next drought [59]. Droughts can trigger other disturbances such as wildfires [60] and pest invasion [64]. While fire and drought can increase short-term SOC accumulation, their long-term impacts on C cycling are still unclear [65]. Droughts interacting with high temperatures can cause plant mortality and accelerate seed germination and ecological invasion due to favorable weather conditions [66]. According to the ‘fluctuating resources hypothesis’, the rainfall after drought may even enhance the chance of invasion [67]. These effects of droughts on diversity, productivity, reproduction, phenology, nutrient cycling, and community resistance to invasion indirectly affect grassland C cycling [68].
Usually, the impacts of droughts are regulated by many environmental factors [69], as well as ecosystem traits, such as species and functional diversity [70,71], and succession timing or growth stage [8]. Therefore, alongside global change and human activity, droughts with novel magnitudes, timing, and durations are out of synchrony with the resistance of ecosystems and will have stronger and more complicated effects on C cycling in the future [17,72].

2.3. Elevated CO2 Concentrations

CO2 fertilization effects may be affected when droughts occur [73]. An elevated CO2 environment may also increase the water use efficiency of plants and thus soil moisture—due to the reduction in stomata conductance—and alleviate the impacts of drought [74]. Elevated CO2 could mitigate the effects of drought on grassland net carbon uptake by increasing root growth and plant N uptake [75]. In fact, elevated CO2 directly or indirectly affects plant water loss and may be crucial to understanding the combined effects of drought on the C cycling processes of ecosystems. The long-term effects of CO2 on ecosystem functions are more likely to be indirect responses, such as changes in the biochemical cycle, soil moisture, and species structure, than direct responses through exchanges in production [76]. Elevated CO2 not only increases long-term mean soil moisture [77], but also enhances microbial biomass and density [11]. To a certain extent, rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations might decrease the vulnerability of grassland C to droughts [78].
Atmospheric CO2 enrichment can enhance NPP and mitigate the negative effects of droughts on GPP and NEE [31,79]. Likewise, elevated CO2 concentrations alleviate the negative effects of droughts on soil respiration, principally due to the promotion of carbon assimilation, which increases the substrate supply for respiration in both roots and soil microorganisms [80]. Given a number of adverse environmental and edaphic conditions, the increased resource use efficiency of plant growth under high atmospheric CO2 concentrations cannot prevent a decline in productivity and quality [78]. In one study, elevated atmospheric CO2 reduced the sensitivity of grassland ecosystems to drought and increased grassland productivity by ~5%–15%, depending on water and nutrient availability [81,82]. However, CO2 fertilization decreases when water and N are limited. In fact, these positive effects are unlikely to offset the negative impacts of high temperature changes and decreased summer rainfall, which would lead to more frequent and intense droughts [83]. Consequently, beneficial CO2 fertilization effects are suppressed, and water use efficiency is not enough to compensate for the negative effects of droughts [84]. As the intensity and duration of droughts increasingly result in stomatal closure, the ecosystem can become CO2 limited, which may stimulate C starvation and hydraulic failure [85,86]. Concurrently, droughts can also lead to increasing GHG (Green House Gas) emissions, limiting the vegetation N supply, and change the amount of fixed carbon [87].
The effects of concurrent elevated CO2 levels and droughts on a plant’s water use efficiency are intertwined. As global climate models predict rising temperatures, it is important to acknowledge that CO2 concentrations will interact with the change in precipitation patterns, thereby affecting C cycling. In dry soils, elevated CO2 concentrations coincide with or even contribute to drier conditions, resulting in negative soil respiration responses to temperatures [88]. Elevated CO2 concentrations and extended droughts show a positive interaction, and elevated CO2 can reduce the effects of drought on soil respiration [80]. In contrast, elevated CO2 concentrations restrain diversity, but have little effect on the relative abundance or the production of a community [89]. Thus, those effects indicate the importance of a multi-factor experimental approach to understanding an ecosystem’s response to droughts [18]. Indeed, the interactive effects of multiple factors on grassland C cycling under different drought scenarios are lacking in the literature, especially studies discussing underlying mechanisms. Therefore, further work is needed to evaluate the integrated impacts of multiple factors on grassland C cycling under different drought scenarios.

2.4. Global Warming

Global warming may accelerate the turnover of water [68]. Warming is often accompanied by drought and could reduce the primary production in many temperate grasslands, which is not necessarily mitigated by efforts to maintain or increase species richness [90]. In grassland communities, mild droughts and warming do not lead to enhanced resistance or recovery from an extreme recurrent drought. Also, grasslands experiencing recurrent drought demonstrate a larger decrease in green vegetation cover [91]. For some drought-affected areas, however, annual NPP and NEE are not reduced, likely because higher temperatures enhance photosynthesis, counteracting the drought effects on NPP in those grasslands [91,92]. Meanwhile, it is expected that climate warming may directly accelerate soil respiration by stimulating the activities of soil fauna, microbes, and plant roots, and may indirectly accelerate soil respiration by stimulating N mineralization, litter production, and substrate [93,94]. Warming and prolonged droughts may strongly alter SOM decomposition, but also the quantity and quality of litter input [95,96].
In general, under drought scenarios, warming can cause further aridity of the ecosystem and hence act to further reduce soil respiration. In contrast, many experiments have shown that rising temperatures increase the rate of soil respiration [97,98]. In addition, warming can cause droughts that increase the carbon in roots and weaken the overall acclimation of plants to drought by regulating C allocation between source and sink organs [41]. It is expected that rising temperatures will affect decomposition more than primary productivity [99], the consequence being a net loss of soil C and a positive feedback to the climate system in the long term. However, there is still no agreement on how temperature sensitivity varies with the labiality of SOC [100]. Instead, warming and drought have a direct impact on soil C storage, mainly by altering the mineralization rates of SOM [101]. Also, warming likely affects ANPP in grasslands, and warming effect is moderated by shifts in the C3/C4 ratios of plant communities [102]. Forecasting C cycling between droughts will interact with elevated temperatures in the future has been a significant subject of many models. However, to date, a clear mechanism to cope with this interaction has not been developed.

2.5. N Deposition

CO2 fertilization effects can depend on the amount of available nitrogen and water [73]. Therefore, nitrogen becomes a limiting factor when droughts occur due to strong interactions between water and N [17]. Although variances in droughts can have different effects on ecosystem productivity and C cycling [10], how these might interact with N deposition is not clear.
There are more rapid ecosystem alterations caused by the interactive effects of N deposition and droughts than when N deposition or droughts occur alone [12]. Drought and N additions increase enzymatic efficiency and induce faster decomposition of litter [103]. In the Mongolian steppe, elevated N deposition can enhance the recovery of grassland productivity after drought [104]. Drought can cause nutrient deficiencies, even in fertilized soil. The increased duration and intensity of drought are usually linked to decreasing N mineralization [105], mobility, and absorbance of inorganic nutrients [106,107]. Moreover, plant biomass, N concentration levels, and the amount of N in the whole plant increases by adding water after a short-term or medium-term drought, while they decrease after a long-term drought [108]. N addition increases grassland productivity after a drought [104]. In contrast, N fertilization has been shown to reduce the ability of grassland ecosystems to sustain net CO2 assimilation. N addition enhances within-plot variability in plant size structure at the species level, but did not change total aboveground biomass [109]. Indeed, droughts affect soil respiration by influencing the feedback from soil N pools, because the microbial processes that regulate soil N availability are sensitive to short-term variations in soil moisture [110]. Meanwhile, N and water supplies limit potential NEE. Conversely, soil N availability has little effect on the short-term stability of ecosystem processes to extreme drought [49]. Some results suggest that increases in ANPP associated with N deposition may be offset by precipitation-mediated shifts, with negative consequences for the strength of the ecosystem C sink [111,112]. For grasslands, the frequency and intensity of the disturbances have a key role in C balance [113]. Thus, annual grasslands experiencing higher rates of N may provide lower-than-expected C storage. In short, how C storage responds to N depends on the longer term variations of droughts.

2.6. Grazing

Grazing has been a way of life and a common land use for people in arid and semiarid regions for centuries [114]. Grazing may have uncertain impacts on grassland C cycling [115], as it can have high intensity and relate to drought [116]. Low-intensity grazing coupled with droughts can impact aboveground productivity (AGP) and belowground productivity (BGP) [117]. Moderate grazing was less important than droughts in reducing plant cover, but heavy grazing was at least as influential [118]. Sensitivity to droughts can override grassland productivity, significantly altering C dynamics in grazing management systems [119]. The interaction between grazing and droughts can change diversity, alter dominance, and affect productivity [120]; it also restrains grass stem density and delays recovery in mesic grasslands in North America and South Africa [121]. In grazed and ungrazed North American tallgrass prairie sites, ANPP was relatively resilient under drought. Moreover, grasslands with different evolutionary histories respond similarly to grazing and drought. At frequently burned sites, droughts increase grassland sensitivity to grazing. The effects of droughts were not the primary driver of grassland productivity; instead, the magnitude of the effects is similar to those of grazing and fire [122]. Grazing also interacts with droughts to affect BGP, and grazed grassland can be more or less sensitive to changes in precipitation than ungrazed grassland [38]. Frequently grazed grassland has a higher probability of experiencing a drought during a regrowth stage. Drought controls major trends in plant species composition and production, with grazing playing a secondary role [123]. The role of rangelands as sinks or sources of GHG, however, is determined by complex interactions between drought, vegetation, and grazing.
Collectively, grazing and drought have uncertain effects on grassland C dynamics, contingent on the intensity of grazing and the drought as well as grassland type. In the event of extreme drought gives way to a wet year, both enhanced GPP and ER cause greater C uptake on the grazed (uptake 6 g·C·m−2) than on the ungrazed desert steppe (release 43 g·C·m−2). In an extreme year-long drought, a grazed desert steppe (release 70 g·C·m−2) has greater C release due to reduced GPP than ungrazed (release 48 g·C·m−2), but the grazed and ungrazed steppes have comparable ecosystem respiration [117]. The primary challenges in maximizing the potential of rangeland GHG mitigation are to create a complete account of GHG balances across many rangeland ecosystems and to quantify the magnitude and direction of GHG changes, due to interactions between management and environment [119]. Long-term monitoring is needed to thoroughly document mechanisms contributing to C dynamics in semi-arid rangelands in order to fully understand their role as CO2 sinks, given the anticipated trajectory of future climate change [57,124].

2.7. Land-Use Change

Land-use change enhanced the vulnerability to drought and posed a threat to grasslands ecosystem. Land-use and management change can strongly influence variations in grassland SOC [125]. The impacts of land-use change on drought mostly focus on land-use change as a driver of climate change [126]. Grasslands could be influenced by potential variations in droughts and by alterations in land-use changes [127]. Land-use change and droughts may induce multidirectional impacts on an ecosystem [128]. In addition, land-use change can cause a decline in grassland biodiversity and plant cover [129]. Land use can also strongly affect the resistance and resilience of soil food webs to drought [130]. Drought has significant effects on vegetation and may enhance the risk of wildfires [131]. Also, large-scale and destructive shifts in grasslands can change climate conditions and affect vegetation regimes and the surface energy budget, deteriorating water depletion [132,133]. However, drought and land-use change can deteriorate soil erosion, causing soil C to be lost at a faster rate and in larger amounts [134]. It is difficult to distinguish which one is the driver. Land-use change can influence the frequency and duration of drought [135]. Changes in land-use and plant species components can affect the decomposition of litter via a number of mechanisms, such as alterations of litter quality, but also reshape the pattern of temperature and moisture at the soil surface [136,137]. Furthermore, grasslands serve as a significant C sink via improved management, and are highly regulated by biome type and climate conditions [115]. To mitigate drought effects on SOC, land-use change is important to avoid in management practice within a dryland ecosystem [2,138]. Drought and land-use change have a direct impact on the C source/sink function of a grassland ecosystem, and may be major drivers affecting the C budget of grasslands.

2.8. Grassland Ecosystem Properties

To a certain extent, the effects of drought on an ecosystem are related to the traits of the dominant species, as well as plant functional diversity [139]. The ecosystem functions and species composition of grasslands are likely to be impacted by droughts [140]. Drought may have pronounced effects on functional performance, such as C-fixation as well as fluxes and pools [36,56]. However, a grassland’s plant diversity provides a buffer against environmental fluctuations because different species respond differently to these fluctuations, triggering functional compensations among species [11,141]. Plant diversity has a stronger effect on soil microbial functions and enzymes [142]. Plant diversity is a major determinant of soil microbial biomass in a changing environment [143]. Specifically the ability for a community to maintain ecosystem functions during a stressful event (resistance) or to recover rapidly from it (resilience) is a component of stability [144]. Likewise, a grassland may withstand moderate drought in areas with rich biodiversity [104,145]. In particular, greater ecological diversity means higher resistance to drought because of the complementary use of available water and other resources when compared to communities with low ecological diversity [146]. Accordingly, at the species level, the individual may not respond to drought, but the ecosystem significantly responds [147]. Because of high diversity, the ecosystem exhibits greater stability and ensures species persistence and ecosystem functions [71,148]. Post-drought recovery of an ecosystem is much more rapid where greater levels of biodiversity are conserved than in less diverse areas [149]. On the other hand, droughts are not buffered by increased biodiversity richness. Intriguingly, frequent mild droughts did not change the productivity patterns and point to a higher resistance to severe droughts, with increasing richness levels not necessarily enhancing resistance [91]. Similarly, higher drought stress with increased biodiversity richness led to greater mortality, yet all communities are able to recover similar green cover post-drought [150]. In fact, another threat to C sequestration in grassland stems from the rapid loss of plant diversity, which is projected under climate change [151].
In a grassland, soil plays an important role in buffering the impacts from drought. Plant–soil interaction plays an important role in regulating C cycling [152]. The adaptive strategies of plant–soil interactions play a key role in the short-term stability of C cycling to extreme drought events [49]. To better withstand times of drought, increased amounts of C sequestered as SOM into soil enhance rainfall effectiveness through increased infiltration, water-holding capacity, and water source replenishment. Moreover, grasslands may be most likely missing C-sinks [3,113], owing to grasslands potential capacity to sequester and store C in soils [5,153]. Higher soil C levels can reduce the impacts of droughts [154,155]. The relative extent of drought impacts on soil respiration depends on the level of belowground biomass and soil C [156]. Sequestering C in grassland soils brings about a number of positive environmental outcomes, or co-benefits, beyond offsetting GHG emissions [157]. SOM plays an important role in determining soil chemical properties, including pH, nutrient availability and cycling, and buffer capacity [158]. Thus, increasing SOM is an effective method for increasing drought resistance in arid and semiarid areas.

3. Syntheses and Perspectives

3.1. Combined Effects of Multiple Factors

Ecosystems exist in a multi-factor world. Global change drivers can mediate the rate and efficiencies of both photosynthesis and water use to affect ecosystem productivity and other processes. Realistic combinations of global change drivers show small diversity effects, but a remarkable effect on dominant species [159]. In addition, global change drivers can alter available resources in an ecosystem by directly affecting the biota and driving ecosystem responses, causing chronic changes in water balance and modifying the biogeochemical cycle of nutrients [160]. Drivers can also change ecosystem nutrient dynamics indirectly by affecting plant litter quality [161]. The natural ecosystem response to global change drivers may be constrained by different perturbations [162]. Collectively, current disturbance regimes and global changes impose a suite of impacts on available resources in an ecosystem [163]. Effects from global change drivers and droughts may interact within ecological diversity and in the composition of natural communities [164]. C cycling may mitigate or exacerbate climate change, depending upon the relative responses of grassland C sequestration and emissions to global change factors and droughts [165].
Climate, fire, and grazing are three important drivers affecting the composition, structure, and function of grasslands. There are also many interactions between these drivers, which affect ecological patterns and processes in grasslands differently than if they were single drivers [166]. Grassland composition and diversity are primarily governed by long-term regional climate. To some extent, grassland composition and diversity can alleviate the impacts of a drought on an ecosystem [121]. In a warmer world, elevated CO2 concentrations will increase both soil water content and productivity in semi-arid grasslands [167]. Adversely, elevated CO2 alone, or in combination with warming, alters ER to a greater extent than GPP, resulting in net C loss by the stimulated decomposition of SOM. For instance, an elevated CO2 concentration causes a greater increase in C cycling than in C storage in grasslands [168], which can alleviate or offset the impacts of a drought on C cycling. Also, anthropogenic pressures such as grazing and land-use change could be key drivers of biodiversity loss, with serious consequences for ecosystem functioning [12]. Simultaneously, the combined effects of environmental factors have great potential to interact and indirectly or directly mediate soil moisture, affecting the main process of C cycling [165].
Similarly, analyses of the roles of other factors in grassland C cycling or ecosystem functions should not overlook the influence of drought. The contribution of each factor to grassland C cycling should be diagnosed and quantified, especially with regard to influencing the relationship between droughts and grassland C cycling in a realistic multi-factor world. Clearly, there has been much progress in the sophistication of both models and experiments. It is no longer considered acceptable to make projections about drought response without incorporating the likely effects from other factors, such as elevated CO2 concentrations and global warming [169]. Doing so is significant in discussing how and why ecosystems have different sensitivities to chronic global change and pulsing droughts [12].
The multi-factor effects differ greatly from simple combinations of single-factor responses because the impacts of abrupt changes and alternative multi-factors induced nonlinear changes in the ecosystem [18]. Concurrent changes in multiple factors potentially trigger complex interactive impacts on ecosystem structure and functioning. For example, CO2 enrichment restrains the effects of increasing temperature, precipitation, and available N on NPP annually in Californian grasslands [170]. Moreover, the amplification or suppression of one factor’s impact by another factor on soil C has not been observed in most studies [161,171]. These effects are the key to identifying the most sensitive factors affecting C cycling. Therefore, evaluating multi-factor interactions influencing ecosystem structure and functioning is critical to understanding their response to global change. Indeed, once interactive effects can regulate the main effects of single factors, single-factor experiments will become less useful in understanding ecosystem changes [171]. There are a number of single factors that help assess the impacts of global change, such as rainfall manipulation experiments [10], FACE experiments, and N-addition experiments [12]. A multi-factor experimental approach explains ecosystem responses to multiple factors, especially under different drought stress scenarios [172].
Usually, multi-factor experiments are quite expensive and provide imprecise results and undefined interactive mechanisms. They also cannot be properly managed in many ecosystems due to financial constraints. To make multi-factor experiments more effective, models can help imitate the formation of a scientific hypothesis in its initial stages and extrapolate experimental results [171]. Ecosystem models should incorporate the direct and indirect effects of climate change on soil moisture to accurately predict drought feedback and the long-term effects of C cycling. Models can be informed by single-factor experiments that provide ecosystem-level information for single-factor responses. Multi-factor experiments are important for testing concepts, thus indicating the reality of multi-factor influences. However, large uncertainties remain in most current models that evaluate the feedbacks between C-cycle and climate change over the past few decades.
Fortunately, close cooperation between experimentalists and modelers make it easier to understand water and C cycling via explicit programs of model–data fusion, such as data sharing, data assimilation, and clarity of model processes. A major improvement in current observations may be gained by the combination of long-term, multi-factor experiments at the ecosystem level, such as whole-ecosystem flux measurements. To some extent, the coupled C-cycle–climate models can demonstrate the importance of potential carbon-cycle–climate system feedbacks [17]. However, much work towards these experiments and models is needed to increase our understanding of the mechanisms between drought and grassland C cycling in the multi-factor world at the ecosystem level. In general, the emerging gaps are as follows:
(1)
Under particular scenarios such as droughts, recognizing the key environmental factors impacting grassland C cycling in the real, multi-factor world is important. It is necessary to carry out multi-factor experiments to determine the contribution of each factor and their interactive effects with other factors on grassland C cycling at the ecosystem scale.
(2)
The quantitative impacts between drought and other factors (e.g., elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, N deposition, grazing, and other land-use change) on grassland C cycling are not clearly proposed at the ecosystem level.
(3)
The next challenge is to establish the quantitative relationships between different C fluxes and different global change factors under different drought scenarios as soon as possible.
(4)
Multi-factor response models should be developed with better coupling mechanisms to examine the interactive effects of global change multi-factors on the carbon and water processes of ecosystems, especially under different levels of drought stress or other extreme scenarios. The data–model fusion has become essential to assess the interactive effects of multiple factors in global change research.

3.2. A Framework for Assessment and Application of Combined Effects

Practical fluctuations with the background of global changes would result in an intricate blend of internal processes and external forces on ecosystem, which can trigger a regime shift in grasslands [173]. According to the ‘fluctuating resources hypothesis’, ecosystems become more susceptible to biological encroachment whenever the amount of idled resources increases in two basic ways: declines in the supply and use of ecosystem or external resources. A disturbance such as drought, grazing, or other land-use change could damage or kill resident vegetation and reduce resource uptake (light, water, and nutrients) [174]. Drought coupled with global change drivers or with favorable weather conditions can induce plant mortality or promote seed germination and ecological invasion, respectively [175]. It is clear that several interacting global change drivers and droughts trigger shifts in ecological thresholds [12].
However, there is not enough knowledge about how drought affects biodiversity and ecosystem function. The framework describes a hierarchy of mechanisms that climate change uses to impact ecosystem C dynamics, generating three levels of response, and also provides a new approach to the studying climate change impacts on C cycling [176]. The expression of functional thresholds is affected by many factors including droughts, other global change drivers, and ecosystem characteristics. Combined multi-factor effects may make ecosystems surpass ecological thresholds, resulting in a reconfigured ecosystem structure and function and a profound influence on C cycling. Rapid ecosystem shifts are triggered by droughts occurring within the background of gradual global change, overgrazing, land-use change, and invasive species [177], and is projected to increase in the future because ecosystem resilience is corroded by chronic global changes [12]. The interactions between drought and global change drivers influence and accelerate the trajectories of ecosystem response [178]. An ecotone shift caused by drought has severe consequences on ecological and accelerates soil erosion, which induces large losses of soil C [173]. The shifts of grassland composition in response to seasonal or annual precipitation regimes represent drought-induced alterations of vegetation dynamics that may trigger threshold development [12]. Ecological thresholds must further evaluate and develop to effectively manage grassland C cycling and fully assess the ecological consequences of climate extremes for ecosystem structure and function [179]. Threshold recognition and prediction is significant to help managers prevent the emergence of undesirable states and promote the management of grassland C cycling [180]. We do not know the ecological mechanisms trigger the ecological threshold, or the speed and degree of response to the triggering threshold. Therefore, a systematic framework that assesses ecosystem dynamics in response to drought under current and future global change and human activity is urgently needed to focus on the combined effects that drought and global change drivers have on an ecosystem and to assess the hierarchical response of that ecosystem [181,182]. More research is needed to create a framework that meets the following needs:
(1)
Defines the intensity and duration of drought at which ecological thresholds are triggered;
(2)
Represents ecological mechanisms of response to drought under current and future global change scenarios at different spatial–temporal scales;
(3)
Assesses the hierarchical responses of an ecosystem to drought and global change, including individual, species, and ecosystem responses;
(4)
Quantifies the contribution of other global change drivers that prevent ecological thresholds triggered by droughts;
(5)
Provides a baseline to assess the impact of drought under global change;
(6)
Assesses the contribution of ecological thresholds to the fate of grassland C cycling;
(7)
Gives suggestions to managers can use to enhance C sink of grasslands.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No.: 2016M591214), the Natural Science Foundation of China (31170454 and 41601569), the National High Technology Research Development Plan (2012AA12A309), and the IWHR Research & Development Support Program (JZ0145B052016). We appreciate the insightful comments from the editors and reviewers on the earlier version. We also thank Gabriela Shirkey for the careful language editing.

Author Contributions

Tianjie Lei, Changliang Shao and Zhiguo Pang designed the draft framework and wrote the initial draft. June Fu, Guangyuan Kan and Xiaolei Zhang revised the draft framework. The other authors modified and supplemented the ideas, examples, and references for the final draft.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Joos, O.; Hagedorn, F.; Heim, A.; Gilgen, A.; Schmidt, M.; Siegwolf, R.; Buchmann, N. Summer drought reduces total and litter-derived soil CO2 effluxes intemperate grassland–clues from a 13C litter addition experiment. Biogeosciences 2010, 7, 1031–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  2. Lal, R. Soil carbon sequestration impacts on global climate change and food security. Science 2004, 304, 1623–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Scurlock, J.; Hall, D. The global carbon sink: A grassland perspective. Glob. Chang. Biol. 1998, 4, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Imer, D.; Merbold, L.; Eugster, W.; Buchmann, N. Temporal and spatial variations of soil CO2, CH4 and N2O fluxes at three differently managed grasslands. Biogeosciences 2013, 10, 5931–5945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Abberton, M.; Conant, R.; Batello, C. Grassland Carbon Sequestration: Management, Policy and Economics; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; pp. 1–53. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cherwin, K.; Knapp, A. Unexpected patterns of sensitivity to drought in three semi-arid grasslands. Oecologia 2012, 169, 845–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Stocker, T.F.; Dahe, Q.; Plattner, G.-K. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Summary for Policymakers (IPCC, 2013); IPCC: Bern, Switzerland, 2013; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  8. Vogel, A.; Scherer-Lorenzen, M.; Weigelt, A. Grassland resistance and resilience after drought depends on management intensity and species richness. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e36992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Qu, L.; Chen, J.; Dong, G.; Jiang, S.; Li, L.; Guo, J.; Shao, C. Heat waves reduce ecosystem carbon sink strength in a Eurasian meadow steppe. Environ. Res. 2015, 144, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Knapp, A.K.; Fay, P.A.; Blair, J.M.; Collins, S.L.; Smith, M.D.; Carlisle, J.D.; Harper, C.W.; Danner, B.T.; Lett, M.S.; McCarron, J.K. Rainfall variability, carbon cycling, and plant species diversity in a mesic grassland. Science 2002, 298, 2202–2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Smith, M.D. The ecological role of climate extremes: Current understanding and future prospects. J. Ecol. 2011, 99, 651–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Smith, M.D.; Knapp, A.K.; Collins, S.L. A framework for assessing ecosystem dynamics in response to chronic resource alterations induced by global change. Ecology 2009, 90, 3279–3289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Brookshire, E.; Weaver, T. Long-term decline in grassland productivity driven by increasing dryness. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 7148–7152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Frank, D.; Reichstein, M.; Bahn, M.; Thonicke, K.; Frank, D.; Mahecha, M.D.; Smith, P.; Velde, M.; Vicca, S.; Babst, F. Effects of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon cycle: Concepts, processes and potential future impacts. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 2861–2880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  15. Bahn, M.; Reichstein, M.; Guan, K.; Moreno, J.; Williams, C. Preface: Climate extremes and biogeochemical cycles in the terrestrial biosphere: Impacts and feedbacks across scales. Biogeosciences 2015, 12, 4827–4830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yuan, W.; Cai, W.; Chen, Y.; Liu, S.; Dong, W.; Zhang, H.; Yu, G.; Chen, Z.; He, H.; Guo, W. Severe summer heatwave and drought strongly reduced carbon uptake in Southern China. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Heimann, M.; Reichstein, M. Terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics and climate feedbacks. Nature 2008, 451, 289–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Dieleman, W.I.; Vicca, S.; Dijkstra, F.A.; Hagedorn, F.; Hovenden, M.J.; Larsen, K.S.; Morgan, J.A.; Volder, A.; Beier, C.; Dukes, J.S. Simple additive effects are rare: A quantitative review of plant biomass and soil process responses to combined manipulations of CO2 and temperature. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2012, 18, 2681–2693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Allaby, M. Grasslands; Infobase Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 1–126. [Google Scholar]
  20. De Boeck, H.J.; Dreesen, F.E.; Janssens, I.A.; Nijs, I. Whole-system responses of experimental plant communities to climate extremes imposed in different seasons. New Phytol. 2011, 189, 806–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Gibson, D.J. Grasses and Grassland Ecology; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009; pp. 1–300. [Google Scholar]
  22. Tardieu, F.; Granier, C.; Muller, B. Water deficit and growth. Co-ordinating processes without an orchestrator? Curr. Opin. Plant Boil. 2011, 14, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Chang, J.; Ciais, P.; Viovy, N.; Vuichard, N.; Herrero, M.; Havlík, P.; Wang, X.; Sultan, B.; Soussana, J.F. Effect of climate change, CO2 trends, nitrogen addition, and land-cover and management intensity changes on the carbon balance of European grasslands. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2016, 22, 338–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  24. Smith, M.D.; Knapp, A.K. Physiological and morphological traits of exotic, invasive exotic, and native plant species in tallgrass prairie. Int. J. Plant Sci. 2001, 162, 785–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dai, A. Drought under global warming: A review. WIREs Clim. Chang. 2011, 2, 45–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ciais, P.; Reichstein, M.; Viovy, N.; Granier, A.; Ogée, J.; Allard, V.; Aubinet, M.; Buchmann, N.; Bernhofer, C.; Carrara, A. Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature 2005, 437, 529–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Pereira, J.; Mateus, J.; Aires, L.; Pita, G.; Pio, C.; David, J.; Andrade, V.; Banza, J.; David, T.; Paço, T. Net ecosystem carbon exchange in three contrasting Mediterranean ecosystems—The effect of drought. Biogeosciences 2007, 4, 791–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Van Eekeren, N.; Bommelé, L.; Bloem, J.; Schouten, T.; Rutgers, M.; de Goede, R.; Reheul, D.; Brussaard, L. Soil biological quality after 36 years of ley-arable cropping, permanent grassland and permanent arable cropping. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2008, 40, 432–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jentsch, A.; Kreyling, J.; Beierkuhnlein, C. A new generation of climate-change experiments: Events, not trends. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2007, 5, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. White, P.S.; Jentsch, A. The search for generality in studies of disturbance and ecosystem dynamics. In Progress in Botany; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2001; pp. 399–450. [Google Scholar]
  31. Xiao, J.; Zhuang, Q.; Liang, E.; McGuire, A.D.; Moody, A.; Kicklighter, D.W.; Shao, X.; Melillo, J.M. Twentieth-Century Droughts and Their Impacts on Terrestrial Carbon Cycling in China. Earth Interact. 2009, 13, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Thiessen, S.; Gleixner, G.; Wutzler, T.; Reichstein, M. Both priming and temperature sensitivity of soil organic matter decomposition depend on microbial biomass—An incubation study. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2013, 57, 739–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hufkens, K.; Keenan, T.F.; Flanagan, L.B.; Scott, R.L.; Bernacchi, C.J.; Joo, E.; Brunsell, N.A.; Verfaillie, J.; Richardson, A.D. Productivity of North American grasslands is increased under future climate scenarios despite rising aridity. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Leitinger, G.; Ruggenthaler, R.; Hammerle, A.; Lavorel, S.; Schirpke, U.; Clement, J.C.; Lamarque, P.; Obojes, N.; Tappeiner, U. Impact of droughts on water provision in managed alpine grasslands in two climatically different regions of the Alps. Ecohydrology 2015, 8, 1600–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Hasibeder, R.; Fuchslueger, L.; Richter, A.; Bahn, M. Summer drought alters carbon allocation to roots and root respiration in mountain grassland. New Phytol. 2015, 205, 1117–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Jentsch, A.; Kreyling, J.; Elmer, M.; Gellesch, E.; Glaser, B.; Grant, K.; Hein, R.; Lara, M.; Mirzae, H.; Nadler, S.E. Climate extremes initiate ecosystem-regulating functions while maintaining productivity. J. Ecol. 2011, 99, 689–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nemani, R.R.; Keeling, C.D.; Hashimoto, H.; Jolly, W.M.; Piper, S.C.; Tucker, C.J.; Myneni, R.B.; Running, S.W. Climate-driven increases in global terrestrial net primary production from 1982 to 1999. Science 2003, 300, 1560–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Xu, Z.; Zhou, G. Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. J. Exp. Bot. 2008, 59, 3317–3325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Hoover, D.L.; Rogers, B.M. Not all droughts are created equal: The impacts of interannual drought pattern and magnitude on grassland carbon cycling. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 22, 1809–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Canarini, A.; Dijkstra, F.A. Dry-rewetting cycles regulate wheat carbon rhizodeposition, stabilization and nitrogen cycling. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2015, 81, 195–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Xu, Z.-Z.; Zhou, G.-S. Effects of water stress and high nocturnal temperature on photosynthesis and nitrogen level of a perennial grass Leymus chinensis. Plant Soil 2005, 269, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Harper, C.W.; Blair, J.M.; Fay, P.A.; Knapp, A.K.; Carlisle, J.D. Increased rainfall variability and reduced rainfall amount decreases soil CO2 flux in a grassland ecosystem. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2005, 11, 322–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fay, P.A.; Carlisle, J.D.; Knapp, A.K.; Blair, J.M.; Collins, S.L. Productivity responses to altered rainfall patterns in a C4-dominated grassland. Oecologia 2003, 137, 245–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Potts, D.L.; Huxman, T.E.; Cable, J.M.; English, N.B.; Ignace, D.D.; Eilts, J.A.; Mason, M.J.; Weltzin, J.F.; Williams, D.G. Antecedent moisture and seasonal precipitation influence the response of canopy-scale carbon and water exchange to rainfall pulses in a semi-arid grassland. New Phytol. 2006, 170, 849–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Fernandez, A.; Fort, H. Catastrophic phase transitions and early warnings in a spatial ecological model. J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp. 2009, 5, 1255–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Heschel, M.S.; Riginos, C. Mechanisms of selection for drought stress tolerance and avoidance in Impatiens capensis (Balsaminaceae). Am. J. Bot. 2005, 92, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Blum, A. Plant Water Relations, Plant Stress and Plant Production; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2011; pp. 1–305. [Google Scholar]
  48. Heitschmidt, R.; Haferkamp, M. Ecological consequences of drought and grazing on grasslands of the Northern Great Plains. In Changing Precipitation Regimes and Terrestrial Ecosystems: A North American Perspective; University of Arizona Press: Tucson, AZ, USA, 2003; pp. 207–226. [Google Scholar]
  49. Bloor, J.M.; Bardgett, R.D. Stability of above-ground and below-ground processes to extreme drought in model grassland ecosystems: Interactions with plant species diversity and soil nitrogen availability. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2012, 14, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gilgen, A.; Buchmann, N. Response of temperate grasslands at different altitudes to simulated summer drought differed but scaled with annual precipitation. Biogeosci. Discuss. 2009, 6, 2525–2539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  51. Shinoda, M.; Nachinshonhor, G.; Nemoto, M. Impact of drought on vegetation dynamics of the Mongolian steppe: A field experiment. J. Arid Environ. 2010, 74, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Vries, F.T.D.; Liiri, M.E.; Bjørnlund, L.; Setälä, H.M.; Christensen, S.; Bardgett, R.D. Legacy effects of drought on plant growth and the soil food web. Oecologia 2012, 170, 821–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Evans, S.E.; Wallenstein, M.D. Climate change alters ecological strategies of soil bacteria. Ecol. Lett. 2013, 17, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Fuchslueger, L.; Bahn, M.; Fritz, K.; Hasibeder, R.; Richter, A. Experimental drought reduces the transfer of recently fixed plant carbon to soil microbes and alters the bacterial community composition in a mountain meadow. New Phytol. 2014, 201, 916–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Evans, S.E.; Wallenstein, M.D. Soil microbial community response to drying and rewetting stress: Does historical precipitation regime matter? Biogeochemistry 2012, 109, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Scott, R.L.; Biederman, J.A.; Hamerlynck, E.P.; Barron-Gafford, G.A. The carbon balance pivot point of southwestern US semiarid ecosystems: Insights from the 21st century drought. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2015, 120, 2612–2624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Liebig, M.; Kronberg, S.; Hendrickson, J.; Gross, J. Grazing management, season, and drought contributions to near-surface soil property dynamics in semiarid rangeland. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2014, 67, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Williams, N.; Holland, K. The ecology and invasion history of hawkweeds (Hieracium species) in Australia. Plant Prot. Q. 2007, 22, 76–80. [Google Scholar]
  59. Reichstein, M.; Bahn, M.; Ciais, P.; Frank, D.; Mahecha, M.D.; Seneviratne, S.I.; Zscheischler, J.; Beer, C.; Buchmann, N.; Frank, D.C. Climate extremes and the carbon cycle. Nature 2013, 500, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Kreyling, J.; Beierkuhnlein, C.; Elmer, M.; Pritsch, K.; Radovski, M.; Schloter, M.; Wöllecke, J.; Jentsch, A. Soil biotic processes remain remarkably stable after 100-year extreme weather events in experimental grassland and heath. Plant Soil 2008, 308, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Craine, J.M.; Towne, E.; Tolleson, D.; Nippert, J.B. Precipitation timing and grazer performance in a tallgrass prairie. Oikos 2013, 122, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Schubert, S.D.; Suarez, M.J.; Pegion, P.J.; Koster, R.D.; Bacmeister, J.T. On the cause of the 1930s Dust Bowl. Science 2004, 303, 1855–1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Van der Molen, M.; Dolman, A.; Ciais, P.; Eglin, T.; Gobron, N.; Law, B.; Meir, P.; Peters, W.; Phillips, O.; Reichstein, M. Drought and ecosystem carbon cycling. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2011, 151, 765–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bradley, B.A.; Houghton, R.; Mustard, J.F.; Hamburg, S.P. Invasive grass reduces aboveground carbon stocks in shrublands of the Western US. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2006, 12, 1815–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Martí-Roura, M.; Casals, P.; Romanyà, J. Temporal changes in soil organic C under Mediterranean shrublands and grasslands: Impact of fire and drought. Plant Soil 2011, 338, 289–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Louhaichi, M.; Tastad, A. The Syrian steppe: Past trends, current status, and future priorities. Rangelands 2010, 32, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Davis, M.A.; Grime, J.P.; Thompson, K. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: A general theory of invasibility. J. Ecol. 2000, 88, 528–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Jentsch, A.; Beierkuhnlein, C. Research frontiers in climate change: Effects of extreme meteorological events on ecosystems. C. R. Geosci. 2008, 340, 621–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ferlan, M.; Eler, K.; Simončič, P.; Batič, F.; Vodnik, D. Carbon and water flux patterns of a drought-prone mid-succession ecosystem developed on abandoned karst grassland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 220, 152–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Tilman, D.; Reich, P.B.; Knops, J.; Wedin, D.; Mielke, T.; Lehman, C. Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 2001, 294, 843–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Tilman, D.; Wedin, D.; Knops, J. Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 1996, 379, 718–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Smith, P.; Fang, C.; Dawson, J.J.; Moncrieff, J.B. Impact of global warming on soil organic carbon. Adv. Agron. 2008, 97, 1–43. [Google Scholar]
  73. Reich, P.B.; Hobbie, S.E.; Lee, T.D. Plant growth enhancement by elevated CO2 eliminated by joint water and nitrogen limitation. Nat. Geosci. 2014, 7, 920–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Campbell, B.; Smith, D.S.; Pastures, G. A synthesis of recent global change research on pasture and rangeland production: Reduced uncertainties and their management implications. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2000, 82, 39–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Roy, J.; Piconcochard, C.; Augusti, A.; Benot, M.L.; Thiery, L.; Darsonville, O.; Landais, D.; Piel, C.; Defossez, M.; Devidal, S. Elevated CO2 maintains grassland net carbon uptake under a future heat and drought extreme. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 6224–6229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Dukes, J.S.; Chiariello, N.R.; Cleland, E.E.; Moore, L.A.; Shaw, M.R.; Thayer, S.; Tobeck, T.; Mooney, H.A.; Field, C.B. Responses of grassland production to single and multiple global environmental changes. PLoS Biol. 2005, 3, e319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  77. Niklaus, P.A.; Spinnler, D.; Körner, C. Soil moisture dynamics of calcareous grassland under elevated CO2. Oecologia 1998, 117, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Soussana, J.F.; Lüscher, A. Temperate grasslands and global atmospheric change: A review. Grass Forage Sci. 2007, 62, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Manderscheid, R.; Weigel, H.-J. Drought stress effects on wheat are mitigated by atmospheric CO2 enrichment. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2007, 27, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, Y.; Hao, Y.; Cui, X.Y.; Zhao, H.; Xu, C.; Zhou, X.; Xu, Z. Responses of soil respiration and its components to drought stress. J. Soils Sediments 2014, 14, 99–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Soussana, J.; Casella, E.; Loiseau, P. Long-term effects of CO2 enrichment and temperature increase on a temperate grass sward. Plant Soil 1996, 182, 101–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Tubiello, F.N.; Soussana, J.-F.; Howden, S.M. Crop and pasture response to climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 19686–19690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Lehner, B.; Döll, P.; Alcamo, J.; Henrichs, T.; Kaspar, F. Estimating the impact of global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: A continental, integrated analysis. Clim. Chang. 2006, 75, 273–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Zhou, G.; Wang, Y.; Wang, S. Responses of grassland ecosystems to precipitation and land use along the Northeast China Transect. J. Veg. Sci. 2002, 13, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Mcdowell, N.G. Mechanisms linking drought, hydraulics, carbon metabolism, and vegetation mortality. Plant Physiol. 2011, 155, 1051–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. McDowell, N.G.; Sevanto, S. The mechanisms of carbon starvation: How, when, or does it even occur at all? New Phytol. 2010, 186, 264–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Bork, E.; Cahill, J.; Chang, S.; Deutsch, E.; Attaeian, B.; Wang, P.; Shore, B.; White, S. Rangeland Responses to Climate Change; Department of Agricultural, Food & Nutritional Science, Agriculture/Forestry Centre, University of Alberta Edmonton: Edmonton, AB, Canada, 2009; pp. 1–115. [Google Scholar]
  88. Wan, S.; Norby, R.J.; Ledford, J.; Weltzin, J.F. Responses of soil respiration to elevated CO2, air warming, and changing soil water availability in a model old-field grassland. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2007, 13, 2411–2424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lindberg, N.; Bengtsson, J. Recovery of forest soil fauna diversity and composition after repeated summer droughts. Oikos 2006, 114, 494–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. De Boeck, H.D.; Lemmens, C.; Zavalloni, C.; Gielen, B.; Malchair, S.; Carnol, M.; Merckx, R.; Van den Berge, J.; Ceulemans, R.; Nijs, I. Biomass production in experimental grasslands of different species richness during three years of climate warming. Biogeosciences 2008, 5, 585–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zavalloni, C.; Gielen, B.; Lemmens, C.; De Boeck, H.; Blasi, S.; Van den Bergh, S.; Nijs, I.; Ceulemans, R. Does a warmer climate with frequent mild water shortages protect grassland communities against a prolonged drought? Plant Soil 2008, 308, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lombardozzi, D.L.; Bonan, G.B.; Smith, N.G.; Dukes, J.S.; Fisher, R.A. Temperature acclimation of photosynthesis and respiration: A key uncertainty in the carbon cycle-climate feedback. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2015, 42, 8624–8631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Melillo, J.; Steudler, P.; Aber, J.; Newkirk, K.; Lux, H.; Bowles, F.; Catricala, C.; Magill, A.; Ahrens, T.; Morrisseau, S. Soil warming and carbon-cycle feedbacks to the climate system. Science 2002, 298, 2173–2176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Pendall, E.; Bridgham, S.; Hanson, P.J.; Hungate, B.; Kicklighter, D.W.; Johnson, D.W.; Law, B.E.; Luo, Y.; Megonigal, J.P.; Olsrud, M. Below-ground process responses to elevated CO2 and temperature: A discussion of observations, measurement methods, and models. New Phytol. 2004, 162, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Sanaullah, M.; Chabbi, A.; Rumpel, C.; Kuzyakov, Y. Carbon allocation in grassland communities under drought stress followed by 14C pulse labeling. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2012, 55, 132–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Hoover, D.L.; Knapp, A.K.; Smith, M.D. The immediate and prolonged effects of climate extremes on soil respiration in a mesic grassland. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2016, 121, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Emmett, B.A.; Beier, C.; Estiarte, M.; Tietema, A.; Kristensen, H.L.; Williams, D.; Penuelas, J.; Schmidt, I.; Sowerby, A. The response of soil processes to climate change: Results from manipulation studies of shrublands across an environmental gradient. Ecosystems 2004, 7, 625–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Knapp, A.K.; Beier, C.; Briske, D.D.; Classen, A.T.; Luo, Y.; Reichstein, M.; Smith, M.D.; Smith, S.D.; Bell, J.E.; Fay, P.A. Consequences of more extreme precipitation regimes for terrestrial ecosystems. Bioscience 2008, 58, 811–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Davidson, E.A.; Janssens, I.A. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature 2006, 440, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Conant, R.T.; Drijber, R.A.; Haddix, M.L.; Parton, W.J.; Paul, E.A.; Plante, A.F.; Six, J.; Steinweg, J.M. Sensitivity of organic matter decomposition to warming varies with its quality. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2008, 14, 868–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sanaullah, M.; Chabbi, A.; Girardin, C.; Durand, J.-L.; Poirier, M.; Rumpel, C. Effects of drought and elevated temperature on biochemical composition of forage plants and their impact on carbon storage in grassland soil. Plant Soil 2014, 374, 767–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Mowll, W.; Blumenthal, D.M.; Cherwin, K.; Smith, A.; Symstad, A.J.; Vermeire, L.T.; Collins, S.L.; Smith, M.D.; Knapp, A.K. Climatic controls of aboveground net primary production in semi-arid grasslands along a latitudinal gradient portend low sensitivity to warming. Oecologia 2015, 177, 959–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Stursova, M.; Crenshaw, C.L.; Sinsabaugh, R.L. Microbial responses to long-term N deposition in a semiarid grassland. Microb. Ecol. 2006, 51, 90–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Naeem, S.; Thompson, L.J.; Lawler, S.P.; Lawton, J.H.; Woodfin, R.M. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature 1994, 368, 734–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Borken, W.; Matzner, E. Reappraisal of drying and wetting effects on C and N mineralization and fluxes in soils. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2009, 15, 808–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Da Silva, E.C.; de Albuquerque, M.B.; de Azevedo Neto, A.D.; da Silva Junior, C.D. Drought and its consequences to plants—From individual to ecosystem. In Responses of Organisms to Water Stress; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2013; pp. 17–47. [Google Scholar]
  107. Kopittke, G.; Tietema, A.; Verstraten, J. Soil acidification occurs under ambient conditions but is retarded by repeated drought: Results of a field-scale climate manipulation experiment. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 439, 332–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Xu, Z.; Zhou, G.; Wang, Y. Effects of drought and rewatering on carbon and nitrogen allocations in Leymus chinensis grass. J. Meteorol. Environ. 2007, 3, 65–71. [Google Scholar]
  109. Xi, N.; Carrère, P.; Bloor, J.M. Plant community responses to precipitation and spatial pattern of nitrogen supply in an experimental grassland ecosystem. Oecologia 2015, 178, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Orwin, K.H.; Stevenson, B.A.; Smaill, S.J.; Kirschbaum, M.U.; Dickie, I.A.; Clothier, B.E.; Garrett, L.G.; Weerden, T.J.; Beare, M.H.; Curtin, D. Effects of climate change on the delivery of soil-mediated ecosystem services within the primary sector in temperate ecosystems: A review and New Zealand case study. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 2844–2860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Harpole, W.S.; Tilman, D. Grassland species loss resulting from reduced niche dimension. Nature 2007, 446, 791–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Weltzin, J.F.; Loik, M.E.; Schwinning, S.; Williams, D.G.; Fay, P.A.; Haddad, B.M.; Harte, J.; Huxman, T.E.; Knapp, A.K.; Lin, G. Assessing the response of terrestrial ecosystems to potential changes in precipitation. Bioscience 2003, 53, 941–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Soussana, J.F.; Loiseau, P.; Vuichard, N.; Ceschia, E.; Balesdent, J.; Chevallier, T.; Arrouays, D. Carbon cycling and sequestration opportunities in temperate grasslands. Soil Use Manag. 2004, 20, 219–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Duivenbooden, N.V. Grazing as a tool for rangeland management in semiarid regions: A case study in the north-western coastal zone of Egypt. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1993, 43, 309–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Conant, R.T.; Paustian, K.; Elliott, E.T. Grassland management and conversion into grassland: Effects on soil carbon. Ecol. Appl. 2001, 11, 343–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Li, S.-G.; Eugster, W.; Asanuma, J.; Kotani, A.; Davaa, G.; Oyunbaatar, D.; Sugita, M. Response of gross ecosystem productivity, light use efficiency, and water use efficiency of Mongolian steppe to seasonal variations in soil moisture. J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeosci. 2008, 113, G01019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Shao, C.; Chen, J.; Li, L. Grazing alters the biophysical regulation of carbon fluxes in a desert steppe. Environ. Res. Lett. 2013, 8, 025012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Coupland, R.T. The effects of fluctuations in weather upon the grasslands of the Great Plains. Bot. Rev. 1958, 24, 273–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Derner, J.D.; Jin, V.L. Chapter 6: Soil Carbon Dynamics and Rangeland Management. In Managing Agricultural Greenhouse Gases; Liebig, M.A., Franzluebbers, A.J., Follett, R.F., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2012; pp. 79–92. [Google Scholar]
  120. Mirzaei, H.; Kreyling, J.; Zaman Hussain, M.; Li, Y.; Tenhunen, J.; Beierkuhnlein, C.; Jentsch, A. A single drought event of 100-year recurrence enhances subsequent carbon uptake and changes carbon allocation in experimental grassland communities. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2008, 171, 681–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Koerner, S.E.; Collins, S.L. Interactive effects of grazing, drought, and fire on grassland plant communities in North America and South Africa. Ecology 2014, 95, 98–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Koerner, S. Effects of global change on savanna grassland ecosystems. In Climate Change: Implications and Role of Grasslands; University of Dublin: Dublin, Ireland, 2012; pp. 181–188. [Google Scholar]
  123. Biondini, M.E.; Patton, B.D.; Nyren, P.E. Grazing intensity and ecosystem processes in a northern mixed-grass prairie, USA. Ecol. Appl. 1998, 8, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Liebig, M.; Kronberg, S.; Hendrickson, J.; Dong, X.; Gross, J. Carbon dioxide efflux from long-term grazing management systems in a semiarid region. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2013, 164, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wang, S.; Wilkes, A.; Zhang, Z.; Chang, X.; Lang, R.; Wang, Y.; Niu, H. Management and land use change effects on soil carbon in northern China’s grasslands: A synthesis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 142, 329–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Schulp, C.J.; Nabuurs, G.-J.; Verburg, P.H. Future carbon sequestration in Europe-effects of land use change. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 127, 251–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Parton, W.J.; Ojima, D.S.; Schimel, D.S. Environmental change in grasslands: Assessment using models. In Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change on Natural Resource Systems; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1994; pp. 111–141. [Google Scholar]
  128. Verburg, P.H. Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models. Landsc. Ecol. 2006, 21, 1171–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Poschlod, P.; Bakker, J.; Kahmen, S. Changing land use and its impact on biodiversity. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2005, 6, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Vries, F.D.; Liiri, M.E.; Bjørnlund, L. Land use alters the resistance and resilience of soil food webs to drought. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 276–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Daniau, A.-L.; Goñi, M.F.S.; Martinez, P.; Urrego, D.H.; Bout-Roumazeilles, V.; Desprat, S.; Marlon, J.R. Orbital-scale climate forcing of grassland burning in southern Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 5069–5073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Verburg, P.H.; Tabeau, A.; Hatna, E. Assessing spatial uncertainties of land allocation using a scenario approach and sensitivity analysis: A study for land use in Europe. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 127, S132–S144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Pielke, R.A.; Marland, G.; Betts, R.A.; Chase, T.N.; Eastman, J.L.; Niles, J.O.; Running, S.W. The influence of land-use change and landscape dynamics on the climate system: Relevance to climate-change policy beyond the radiative effect of greenhouse gases. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2002, 360, 1705–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Lal, R. Global soil erosion by water and carbon dynamics. In Soils and Global Change; Lal, R., Kimble, J., Levine, E., Stewart, B.A., Eds.; CRC Press, Inc.: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1995; pp. 131–142. [Google Scholar]
  135. Wright, C.K.; Wimberly, M.C. Recent land use change in the Western Corn Belt threatens grasslands and wetlands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 4134–4139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Garnier, E.; Lavorel, S.; Ansquer, P.; Castro, H.; Cruz, P.; Dolezal, J.; Eriksson, O.; Fortunel, C.; Freitas, H.; Golodets, C. Assessing the effects of land-use change on plant traits, communities and ecosystem functioning in grasslands: A standardized methodology and lessons from an application to 11 European sites. Ann. Bot. 2007, 99, 967–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Eviner, V.T. Plant traits that influence ecosystem processes vary independently among species. Ecology 2004, 85, 2215–2229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Lal, R. Soil erosion and carbon dynamics. Soil Tillage Res. 2005, 81, 137–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Knapp, A.K.; Carroll, C.J.; Denton, E.M.; La Pierre, K.J.; Collins, S.L.; Smith, M.D. Differential sensitivity to regional-scale drought in six central US grasslands. Oecologia 2015, 177, 949–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Hoeppner, S.S.; Dukes, J.S. Interactive responses of old-field plant growth and composition to warming and precipitation. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2012, 18, 1754–1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Tilman, D.; Hill, J.; Lehman, C. Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science 2006, 314, 1598–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Steinauer, K.; Tilman, D.; Wragg, P.D.; Cesarz, S.; Cowles, J.M.; Pritsch, K.; Reich, P.B.; Weisser, W.W.; Eisenhauer, N. Plant diversity effects on soil microbial functions and enzymes are stronger than warming in a grassland experiment. Ecology 2015, 96, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Thakur, M.P.; Milcu, A.; Manning, P.; Niklaus, P.A.; Roscher, C.; Power, S.; Reich, P.B.; Scheu, S.; Tilman, D.; Ai, F. Plant diversity drives soil microbial biomass carbon in grasslands irrespective of global environmental change factors. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 4076–4085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Loreau, M.; Naeem, S.; Inchausti, P. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2002; pp. 30–305. [Google Scholar]
  145. Craine, J.M.; Wedin, D.A.; Reich, P.B. The response of soil CO2 flux to changes in atmospheric CO2, nitrogen supply and plant diversity. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2001, 7, 947–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Fridley, J.D. The influence of species diversity on ecosystem productivity: How, where, and why? Oikos 2001, 93, 514–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Weißhuhn, K.; Auge, H.; Prati, D. Geographic variation in the response to drought in nine grassland species. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2011, 12, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Tilman, D.; El Haddi, A. Drought and biodiversity in grasslands. Oecologia 1992, 89, 257–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Tilman, D.; Downing, J.A. Biodiversity and stability in grasslands. In Ecosystem Management; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1996; pp. 3–7. [Google Scholar]
  150. Van Peer, L.; Nijs, I.; Reheul, D.; De Cauwer, B. Species richness and susceptibility to heat and drought extremes in synthesized grassland ecosystems: Compositional vs. physiological effects. Funct. Ecol. 2004, 18, 769–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Amézquita, M.C.; Murgueitio, E.; Ibrahim, M.; Ramírez, B. Carbon sequestration in pasture and silvopastoral systems compared with native forests in ecosystems of tropical America. In Grassland Carbon Sequestration: Management, Policy and Economics; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; Volume 11. [Google Scholar]
  152. Wang, Z.; Silva, L.C.; Sun, G.; Luo, P.; Mou, C.; Horwath, W.R. Quantifying the impact of drought on soil-plant interactions: A seasonal analysis of biotic and abiotic controls of carbon and nutrient dynamics in high-altitudinal grasslands. Plant Soil 2015, 389, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Neely, C.; Bunning, S.; Wilkes, A. Review of evidence on drylands pastoral systems and climate change: Implications and opportunities for mitigation and adaptation. In Land Tenure and Management Unit (NRLA); FAO: Rome, Italy, 2009; pp. 1–50. [Google Scholar]
  154. Fynn, A.; Alvarez, P.; Brown, J.; George, M.; Kustin, C.; Laca, E.; Oldfield, J.; Schohr, T.; Neely, C.; Wong, C. Soil carbon sequestration in United States rangelands. In Grassland Carbon Sequestration: Management, Policy and Economics; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; Volume 11. [Google Scholar]
  155. Milne, E.; Sessay, M.; Paustian, K.; Easter, M.; Batjes, N.; Cerri, C.; Kamoni, P.; Gicheru, P.; Oladipo, E.; Minxia, M. Towards a standardized system for the reporting of carbon benefits in sustainable land management projects. In Grassland Carbon Sequestration: Management, Policy and Economics; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; Volume 11. [Google Scholar]
  156. Burri, S.; Niklaus, P.; Buchmann, N.; Kahmen, A. Response of grassland soil respiration to drought: Results from an ecosystem manipulation experiment including 19 sites differing in productivity and diversity. In Proceedings of the EGU General Assembly 2015, Vienna, Austria, 12–17 April 2015; p. 9059.
  157. Magdoff, F.; Weil, R.R. Soil Organic Matter in Sustainable Agriculture; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2004; pp. 1–200. [Google Scholar]
  158. Bot, A.; Benites, J. The Importance of Soil Organic Matter: Key to Drought-Resistant Soil and Sustained Food Production; Food & Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2005; pp. 1–303. [Google Scholar]
  159. Walther, G.-R.; Post, E.; Convey, P.; Menzel, A.; Parmesan, C.; Beebee, T.J.; Fromentin, J.-M.; Hoegh-Guldberg, O.; Bairlein, F. Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature 2002, 416, 389–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. De Vries, F.T.; Shade, A. Controls on soil microbial community stability under climate change. Front. Microbiol. 2013, 4, 293–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Henry, H.A.; Cleland, E.E.; Field, C.B.; Vitousek, P.M. Interactive effects of elevated CO2, N deposition and climate change on plant litter quality in a California annual grassland. Oecologia 2005, 142, 465–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Langley, J.A.; Megonigal, J.P. Ecosystem response to elevated CO2 levels limited by nitrogen-induced plant species shift. Nature 2010, 466, 96–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Ives, A.R.; Carpenter, S.R. Stability and diversity of ecosystems. Science 2007, 317, 58–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Lau, J.A.; Lennon, J.T. Rapid responses of soil microorganisms improve plant fitness in novel environments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 14058–14062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Pendall, E.; Heisler-White, J.L.; Williams, D.G.; Dijkstra, F.A.; Carrillo, Y.; Morgan, J.A.; LeCain, D.R. Warming reduces carbon losses from grassland exposed to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e71921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Blair, R.D.; Kaserman, D.L. Law and Economics of Vertical Integration and Control; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 1–203. [Google Scholar]
  167. Morgan, J.A.; LeCain, D.R.; Pendall, E.; Blumenthal, D.M.; Kimball, B.A.; Carrillo, Y.; Williams, D.G.; Heisler-White, J.; Dijkstra, F.A.; West, M. C4 grasses prosper as carbon dioxide eliminates desiccation in warmed semi-arid grassland. Nature 2011, 476, 202–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Hungate, B.A.; Holland, E.A.; Jackson, R.B.; Chapin, F.S.; Mooney, H.A.; Field, C.B. The fate of carbon in grasslands under carbon dioxide enrichment. Nature 1997, 388, 576–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Norby, R.J.; Luo, Y. Evaluating ecosystem responses to rising atmospheric CO2 and global warming in a multi-factor world. New Phytol. 2004, 162, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Cantarel, A.A.; Bloor, J.M.; Soussana, J.F. Four years of simulated climate change reduces above-ground productivity and alters functional diversity in a grassland ecosystem. J. Veg. Sci. 2013, 24, 113–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Luo, Y.; Gerten, D.; Le Maire, G.; Parton, W.J.; Weng, E.; Zhou, X.; Keough, C.; Beier, C.; Ciais, P.; Cramer, W. Modeled interactive effects of precipitation, temperature, and CO2 on ecosystem carbon and water dynamics in different climatic zones. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2008, 14, 1986–1999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Shaw, M.R.; Zavaleta, E.S.; Chiariello, N.R.; Cleland, E.E.; Mooney, H.A.; Field, C.B. Grassland responses to global environmental changes suppressed by elevated CO2. Science 2002, 298, 1987–1990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Weaver, J.E. Effects of different intensities of grazing on depth and quantity of roots of grasses. J. Range Manag. 1950, 3, 100–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Guo, L.B.; Gifford, R. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: A meta analysis. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2002, 8, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Bestelmeyer, B.T.; Herrick, J.E.; Brown, J.R.; Trujillo, D.A.; Havstad, K.M. Land management in the American Southwest: A state-and-transition approach to ecosystem complexity. Environ. Manag. 2004, 34, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Bardgett, R.D.; Manning, P.; Morriën, E.; Vries, F.T. Hierarchical responses of plant–soil interactions to climate change: Consequences for the global carbon cycle. J. Ecol. 2013, 101, 334–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Scheffer, M.; Carpenter, S.; Foley, J.A.; Folke, C.; Walker, B. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 2001, 413, 591–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  178. Grimm, N.B.; Chapin, F.S., III; Bierwagen, B.; Gonzalez, P.; Groffman, P.M.; Luo, Y.; Melton, F.; Nadelhoffer, K.; Pairis, A.; Raymond, P.A. The impacts of climate change on ecosystem structure and function. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 11, 474–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Smith, M.D. An ecological perspective on extreme climatic events: A synthetic definition and framework to guide future research. J. Ecol. 2011, 99, 656–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Shi, X.; Zhao, D.; Wu, S.; Shi, W.; Dai, E.; Wang, W. Climate change risks for net primary production of ecosystems in China. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2016, 22, 1091–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Collins, S.L.; Carpenter, S.R.; Swinton, S.M.; Orenstein, D.E.; Childers, D.L.; Gragson, T.L.; Grimm, N.B.; Grove, J.M.; Harlan, S.L.; Kaye, J.P. An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological research. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2010, 9, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Lei, T.; Wu, J.; Li, X.; Geng, G.; Shao, C.; Zhou, H.; Wang, Q.; Liu, L. A new framework for evaluating the impacts of drought on net primary productivity of grassland. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 536, 161–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. The schematic diagram describes the complex interaction between drought and global change drivers on grassland C cycling. In the paper, global change drivers include elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, N deposition, grazing, and land-use changes. To some degree, the chronic and gradient factors can counteract the negative effects of drought on grassland C cycling via their positive effects driven by climate change, such as elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, and N deposition; on the other hand, the periodic and pulsing factors can amplify the negative effects of drought on grassland C cycling via human activities such as grazing and land-use change. In grasslands, the ecosystem has the ability to buffer impacts from drought and large amounts of soil C in its surface layers. As climate change and human activities continue, droughts will have a stronger and more complicated effect on C cycling in grassland ecosystems in the future.
Figure 1. The schematic diagram describes the complex interaction between drought and global change drivers on grassland C cycling. In the paper, global change drivers include elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, N deposition, grazing, and land-use changes. To some degree, the chronic and gradient factors can counteract the negative effects of drought on grassland C cycling via their positive effects driven by climate change, such as elevated CO2 concentrations, global warming, and N deposition; on the other hand, the periodic and pulsing factors can amplify the negative effects of drought on grassland C cycling via human activities such as grazing and land-use change. In grasslands, the ecosystem has the ability to buffer impacts from drought and large amounts of soil C in its surface layers. As climate change and human activities continue, droughts will have a stronger and more complicated effect on C cycling in grassland ecosystems in the future.
Water 08 00460 g001
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top