| Literature DB >> 24695101 |
Teresa Dias1, Adelaide Clemente2, Maria Amélia Martins-Loução1, Lucy Sheppard3, Roland Bobbink4, Cristina Cruz1.
Abstract
Enhanced class="Chemical">nitrogen (N) availability is oclass="Chemical">ne of the maiclass="Chemical">n drivers of biodiversity loss aclass="Chemical">nd degradatioclass="Chemical">n of ecosystem fuclass="Chemical">nctioclass="Chemical">ns. However, iclass="Chemical">n very class="Chemical">nutrieclass="Chemical">nt-poor ecosystems, eclass="Chemical">nhaclass="Chemical">nced N iclass="Chemical">nput caclass="Chemical">n, iclass="Chemical">n the short-term, promote diversity. Mediterraclass="Chemical">neaclass="Chemical">n Basiclass="Chemical">n ecosystems are class="Chemical">nutrieclass="Chemical">nt-limited biodiversity hotspots, but class="Chemical">no iclass="Chemical">nformatioclass="Chemical">n is available oclass="Chemical">n their medium- or loclass="Chemical">ng-term respoclass="Chemical">nses to eclass="Chemical">nhaclass="Chemical">nced N iclass="Chemical">nput. Siclass="Chemical">nce 2007, we have beeclass="Chemical">n maclass="Chemical">nipulaticlass="Chemical">ng the form aclass="Chemical">nd dose of available N iclass="Chemical">n a Mediterraclass="Chemical">neaclass="Chemical">n Basiclass="Chemical">n maquis iclass="Chemical">n south-westerclass="Chemical">n Europe that has low ambieclass="Chemical">nt N depositioclass="Chemical">n (<4 kg N ha(-1) yr(-1)) aclass="Chemical">nd low soil N coclass="Chemical">nteclass="Chemical">nt (0.1%). N availability was modified by the additioclass="Chemical">n of 40 kg N ha(-1) yr(-1) as a 1∶1Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24695101 PMCID: PMC3973647 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092517
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Weather conditions and main experimental events over the experimental period.
Mean monthly temperature (light grey) and total monthly precipitation (black). Arrows represent the time of N additions from January 2007 to June 2011. Asterisks refers to the occasions of plant community assessments (2007, 2008 and 2011). Litterfall was collected from April to December 2010. “#B” refers to the time of aboveground biomass sampling (June 2011).
Figure 4Impacts of the N treatments on plant biomass.
Aboveground plant biomass (a), estimated litterfall production per year (b) and total aboveground biomass (sum of the standing biomass and the cumulative litterfall produced on the previous four years - c) according to the N treatments (Control, 40A, 40AN and 80AN). Aboveground plant biomass was harvested in June 2011 (the fifth spring of the experiment) from three 1-m2 squares per experimental plot. Litterfall was collected from April to December 2010 using litter traps (five 0.04 m2 per experimental plot). Different letters refer to statistically significant differences between treatments (ANOVA p<0.05 followed by a Bonferroni test). Bars represent the mean (n = 3 experimental plots per treatment) ±SE.
Figure 3Relation between cumulative N and plant richness.
Pearson's correlations between plant richness (number of vascular plant species per 25 m2) and cumulative N (a), NH4 + (b) and NO3 − (c) over the experiment, accounting for estimated background deposition (EMEP- see material and methods). Correlation between plant richness and cumulative NH4 + differed significantly from that between plant richness and cumulative NO3 − [Steiger's Z test (p<0.05)]. Symbols represent the mean (n = 3 experimental plots per treatment and per year) ±SE, but correlations were based on the individual values (n = 36).
Figure 2Impacts of the N treatments on vascular plant diversity.
Response of the vascular plant community to the N treatments (Control, 40A, 40AN and 80AN), in terms of plant richness (a) and evenness (b). Community assessments were performed in the first and fifth springs of N additions: 2007 and 2011 respectively. Different letters refer to statistically significant differences between treatments (two-way ANOVA p<0.05 followed by a Bonferroni test; there were no significant interactions between treatment and time). Bars represent the mean (n = 3 experimental plots per treatment) ±SE.
Plant species potentially indicative of the N dose and form.
| Benefited | Affected | ||
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Plant species that responded consistently (over 5 years of N addition treatments) to the N dose and/or form (Tables S1 and S2).
Impact of the N treatments on soil properties.
| Soil properties | Control | 40A | 40AN | 80AN | |
| N (%) | 2007 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 |
| 2011 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 | 0.1±0.0 | |
| C (%) | 2007 | 1.6±0.2 | 1.6±0.3 | 1.8±0.1 | 2.0±0.6 |
| 2011 | 1.8±0.1 | 1.9±0.2 | 2.1±0.1 | 2.2±0.3 | |
| C/N ratio | 2007 | 18.5±0.8 | 16.6±0.1 | 17.4±1.9 | 16.6±1.0 |
| 2011 | 18.6±0.4 | 17.4±0.7 | 18.1±0.5 | 17.6±0.8 | |
| * | b | ab | ab | a | |
| Nin | 2007 | 5.9±0.9 | 9.4±2.0 | 9.6±2.1 | 10.5±1.9 |
| (μg g−1) | 2011 | 7.9±1.3 | 12.2±1.9 | 12.9±1.6 | 19.2±2.5 |
| * | b | ab | ab | a | |
| NO3 −-N | 2007 | 5.6±0.8 | 8.3±1.9 | 8.9±2.2 | 8.1±1.7 |
| (μg g−1) | 2011 | 7.3±1.3 | 9.8±1.1 | 12.0±1.5 | 17.4±2.3 |
| * | b | ab | ab | a | |
| NH4 +-N | 2007 | 0.3±0.1 | 1.1±0.3 | 0.7±0.1 | 2.4±0.3 |
| (μg g−1) | 2011 | 0.6±0.1 | 2.3±1.0 | 0.9±0.1 | 1.8±0.5 |
| * | b | ab | ab | a | |
| OM (%) | 2007 | 5.7±0.7 | 5.8±0.3 | 6.4±0.3 | 7.0±1.2 |
| 2011 | 4.9±0.5 | 6.5±0.3 | 7.0±0.5 | 7.8±0.5 | |
| * | |||||
| pH (H2O) | 2007 | 5.8±0.2 | 6.5±0.3 | 6.4±0.1 | 6.6±0.4 |
| 2011 | 5.1±0.2 | 4.9±0.3 | 5.1±0.1 | 5.6±0.3 | |
Soil surface (0–15 cm) properties [total N and C, C/N ratio, concentrations of Nin – extractable inorganic N, NO3 − – nitrate, and NH4 + – ammonium, OM – organic matter, and pH (H2O)], in the first (May 2007) and fifth (May 2011) springs of the experiment, according to the N addition treatment (Control, 40A, 40AN and 80AN). Different letters refer to significant differences between treatments (ANOVA p<0.05 followed by a Bonferroni test), while * refers to significant differences between 2007 and 2011 (there were no significant interactions between time and treatment, p<0.05 – Table S3). Values represent the mean (n = 3 experimental plots per treatment) ±SE.
Figure 5Impact of the N treatments on the % of bare soil.
Response of the % of bare soil to the N treatments (Control, 40A, 40AN and 80AN) on the first and fifth springs of N additions (2007 and 2011). Different letters refer to statistically significant differences between treatments (two-way ANOVA p<0.1 followed by a Bonferroni test; there were no significant interactions between treatment and time). Bars represent the mean (n = 3 experimental plots per treatment) ±SE.