Greater accumulation of litter in spruce (Picea abies) compared to beech (Fagus sylvatica) stands is not a consequence of the inherent recalcitrance of needles

被引:65
作者
Berger, Torsten W. [1 ]
Berger, Petra [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nat Resources & Live Sci BOKU, Inst Forest Ecol, Dept Forest & Soil Sci, A-1190 Vienna, Austria
基金
奥地利科学基金会;
关键词
Decomposition; Fagus sylvatica; Litter quality; Litterbag; Mixing effects; Picea abies; DECOMPOSING FOLIAGE LITTER; MIXED STANDS; NORWAY SPRUCE; NUTRIENT RELEASE; FOREST TYPE; PURE; PLANT; SOILS; DEPOSITION; BROADLEAF;
D O I
10.1007/s11104-012-1165-z
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Replacement of beech by spruce is associated with changes in soil acidity, soil structure and humus form, which are commonly ascribed to the recalcitrance of spruce needles. It is of practical relevance to know how much beech must be admixed to pure spruce stands in order to increase litter decomposition and associated nutrient cycling. We addressed the impact of tree species mixture within forest stands and within litter on mass loss and nutritional release from litter. Litter decomposition was measured in three adjacent stands of pure spruce (Picea abies), mixed beech-spruce and pure beech (Fagus sylvatica) on three nutrient-rich sites and three nutrient-poor sites over a three-year period using the litterbag method (single species and mixed species bags). Mass loss of beech litter was not higher than mass loss of spruce litter. Mass loss and nutrient release were not affected by litter mixing. Litter decay indicated non-additive patterns, since similar remaining masses under pure beech (47%) and mixed beech-spruce (48%) were significantly lower than under pure spruce stands (67%). Release of the main components of the organic substance (C-org, N-tot, P, S, lignin) and associated K were related to mass loss, while release of other nutrients was not related to mass loss. In contradiction to the widely held assumption of slow decomposition of spruce needles, we conclude that accumulation of litter in spruce stands is not caused by recalcitrance of spruce needles to decay; rather adverse environmental conditions in spruce stands retard decomposition. Mixed beech-spruce stands appear to be as effective as pure beech stands in counteracting these adverse conditions.
引用
收藏
页码:349 / 369
页数:21
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]   Decomposition of beech leaves (Fagus sylvatica) and spruce needles (Picea abies) in pure and mixed stands of beech and spruce [J].
Albers, D ;
Migge, S ;
Schaefer, M ;
Scheu, S .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 2004, 36 (01) :155-164
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1990, PAREYS STUDIENTEXTE
[3]   The role of calcium uptake from deep soils for spruce (Picea abies) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) [J].
Berger, Torsten W. ;
Swoboda, Siegfried ;
Prohaska, Thomas ;
Glatzel, Gerhard .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2006, 229 (1-3) :234-246
[4]   Carbon dioxide emissions of soils under pure and mixed stands of beech and spruce, affected by decomposing foliage litter mixtures [J].
Berger, Torsten W. ;
Inselsbacher, Erich ;
Zechmeister-Boltenstern, Sophie .
SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, 2010, 42 (06) :986-997
[5]   Nutrient cycling and soil leaching in eighteen pure and mixed stands of beech (Fagus sylvatica) and spruce (Picea abies) [J].
Berger, Torsten W. ;
Inselsbacher, Erich ;
Mutsch, Franz ;
Pfeffer, Michael .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2009, 258 (11) :2578-2592
[6]   Nutrient fluxes in pure and mixed stands of spruce (Picea abies) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) [J].
Berger, Torsten W. ;
Untersteiner, Hubert ;
Toplitzer, Martin ;
Neubauer, Christian .
PLANT AND SOIL, 2009, 322 (1-2) :317-342
[7]   Plant-soil feedback in spruce (Picea abies) and mixed spruce-beech (Fagus sylvatica) stands as indicated by dendrochemistry [J].
Berger, TW ;
Köllensperger, G ;
Wimmer, R .
PLANT AND SOIL, 2004, 264 (1-2) :69-83
[8]   Factors controlling soil carbon and nitrogen stores in pure stands of Norway spruce (Picea abies) and mixed species stands in Austria [J].
Berger, TW ;
Neubauer, C ;
Glatzel, G .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2002, 159 (1-2) :3-14
[9]   Why do tree species affect soils? The Warp and Woof of tree-soil interactions [J].
Binkley, D ;
Giardina, C .
BIOGEOCHEMISTRY, 1998, 42 (1-2) :89-106
[10]  
BUCKING W, 1991, UNTERSUCHUNGEN GESUN