This model analyzes nitrogen transformations in lake sediments, demonstrating significant denitrification and nitrification effects.
The combination of various nitrogen (N) transformation pathways (mineralization, nitrification, denitrification, DNRA, anammox) modulates the fixed-N availability in aquatic systems, with important environmental consequences. Several models have been developed to investigate specific processes and estimate their rates, especially in benthic habitats, known hotspots for N-transformation reactions. Constraints on the N cycle are often based on the isotopic composition of N species, which integrates signals from various reactions. However, a comprehensive benthic N-isotope model, encompassing all canonical pathways in a stepwise manner, and including nitrous oxide, was still lacking. Here, we introduce a new diagenetic N-isotope model to analyse benthic N processes and their N-isotopic signatures, validated using field data from the porewaters of the oligotrophic Lake Lucerne (Switzerland). As parameters in such a complex model cannot all uniquely be identified from sparse data alone, we employed Bayesian inference to integrate prior parameter knowledge with data-derived information. For parameters where marginal posterior distributions considerably deviated from prior expectations, we performed sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of these findings. Alongside developing the model, we established a methodology for its effective application in scientific analysis. For Lake Lucerne, the model accurately replicated observed porewater N-isotope and concentration patterns. We identified aerobic mineralization, denitrification, and nitrification as dominant processes, whereas anammox and DNRA played a less important role in surface sediments. Among the estimated N isotope effects, the value for nitrate reduction during denitrification was unexpectedly low (2.8±1.1 ‰). We identified the spatial overlap of multiple reactions to be influential for this result.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mazzoli et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: