surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

18
Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

Upload: quant

Post on 11-Jan-2016

28 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption. Craig See SUNY-ESF. Photo: USFS. Before the leaves fall. 45-63% less nitrogen. 43-73% less phosphorus. ( Boerner 1984). Nutrients move from leaves to stem tissues - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Craig SeeSUNY-ESF

Photo: USFS

Page 2: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Before the leaves fall. . .

•Nutrients move from leaves to stem tissues•Resorption Efficiency = percent of leaf nutrients resorbed before abscission•Is it a predictor of site nutrient status?

• Higher efficiency in nutrient poor sites (Flanagan and Van Cleve 1983, Boerner 1984)

• No effect (Chapin and Moilenan 1991, Schlesinger 1989)

45-63% less nitrogen

43-73% less phosphorus

(Boerner 1984)

Page 3: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Resorption in the MELNHE stands In 2009, trees in mid and old stands resorbed more phosphorus relative to nitrogen than in the younger stands.

Page 4: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

2010 Methods

• Stands Sampled:Young: C1, C2Mid: C4, C6, HB-mid, JB-MidOld: C8, C9, HB-Old, JB-Old

• Fresh leaves sampled August, litter sampled in October

• Stand level resorption efficiency calculated as the mean of plot efficiencies.

• STILL PRETREATMENT

Page 5: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2009 BEECH

Reso

rptio

n Effi

cienc

y

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2010 BEECH

Reso

rptio

n Effi

cienc

y

Page 6: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2010 Sugar Maple

Reso

rptio

n Effi

cienc

y

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2009 SUGAR MAPLERe

sorp

tion

Efficie

ncy

Page 7: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2009 YELLOW BIRCHRe

sorp

tion

Efficie

ncy

C1 C2 C4 C6 C8 C9 HB-M HB-O JB-M JB-O0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2010 Yellow Birch

Reso

rptio

n Effi

cienc

y

Page 8: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Root P Concentrations by StandP Means

Con

cent

ratio

ns (

g/K

g)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

C1 YoungC2 YoungC4 MidC6 MidC8 OldC9 Old

0-1 5-10 10-20

Oa

Size

Depth

10-20 10-2010-205-10 5-10 5-100-1 0-1 0-1

0-10 10-30 30-50

Page 9: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption
Page 10: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption
Page 11: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

1

43

2

Page 12: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

C8 ROOT P CONCENTRATIONS (0-10cm depth)

1 2 3

Page 13: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

AVAILABLE SOIL P FROM RESIN STRIPS

1 2 3 40

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Oe layer

Resin

P (u

g/g)

1 2 3 40

5

10

15

20

25

Oa layer

Resin

P (u

g/g)

1 2 3 40

1

2

3

B layer

Resin

P (u

g/g)

Page 14: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

CUMULATIVE P CONCENTRATION FOR AMMONIUM CHLORIDE + PEROXIDE + COLD NITRIC ACID LEACHES

0.000

0.020

0.040

0.060

0.080

0.100

0.120

0.140

0.160

0.180

0-10 cm10-30 cm30-50 cm

Plots

P Co

ncen

trati

on (m

g/g)

1 2 3

Page 15: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

FOLIAR CONCENTRATIONS

1 2 3 40

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Sugar Maple

fresh leaveslitterfall

Phos

phor

us (m

g/g)

1 2 3 40

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Beech

fresh leaveslitterfall

Phos

phor

us (m

g/g)

10

0.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

Yellow Birch

fresh leaveslitterfall

Phos

phor

us (m

g/g)

Page 16: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Conclusions• Data suggests that site nutrient availability

does affect nutrient resorption• Many of the MELNHE stands (Not C8-3)

may be phosphorus limited• Nutrient limitation at what scale?

Page 17: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Thank You• Ruth Yanai• Melany Fisk• Steven Hamburg• Tim Fahey• Matt Vadeboncoeur• Doug Ryan• Kikang Bae• Shinjini Goswami• Braulio Quintero• Shoestring Crew

Page 18: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption

Aerts, R. 1996. Nutrient resorption from senescing leaves of perennials: Are there general patterns? Journal of ecology 84: 597-608

Boerner, R. 1984. Foliar nutrient dynamics and nutrient use efficiency of four deciduous tree species in relation to site fertility. Journal of Applied Ecology, 21: 1029-1040

Chapin, S., and L. Moilenan. 1991. Nutritional controls over nitrogen and phosphorus resorption from Alaskan birch leaves. Ecology 72: 709-715

Cote, B., J.W. Fyles, H. Djalilvand 2002. Increasing N and P resorption efficiency and proficiency in northern deciduous hardwoods with decreasing foliar N and P concentrations.

Flanagan, P. W., and K. Van Cleve. 1983. Nutrient cycling in relation to decomposition and organic matter quality in taiga ecosystems. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 13: 795-817.

Ryan, D.F., Bormann, FH. 1982. Nutrient resorption in northern hardwood forests. Bioscience 32: 29-32.

Schlesinger, W. H., E. H. DeLucia, and W. D. Billings. 1989. Nutrient-use efficiency of woody plants on contrasting soils in the western Great Basin, Nevada. Ecology 70:105-113

REFERENCES