surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption craig see suny-esf...

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

Upload: stacy-kayton

Post on 14-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS
Page 10: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS
Page 11: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

1

43

2

Page 12: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

C8 ROOT P CONCENTRATIONS (0-10cm depth)

1 2 3

Page 13: Surprising natural variation in nutrient availability and nutrient resorption Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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 Craig See SUNY-ESF Photo: USFS

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