| Literature DB >> 26697029 |
Zhennan Wang1, Jiaoyun Lu1, Mei Yang1, Huimin Yang1, Qingping Zhang1.
Abstract
Element conpan>pan> class="Chemical">centration within a plant which is vital to function maintenance and adaptation to environment, may change with plant growth. However, how carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) vary stoichiometrically with stand growth, i.e., ages or cuts, was still untouched in perennial species. This study tested the hypothesis that lucerne (Medicago sativa) C:N, C:P, and N:P should change with stand age and cut. Leaf C:N, C:P, and N:P changed with stand age, showing various trends in different cuts of lucerne. Generally the greatest stoichiometric ratios were measured in 8 year stand and in the second cut. They were affected significantly and negatively by total N and P concentrations of leaf, but not by organic C concentration. There were significantly positive correlations among leaf C:N, C:P, and N:P. However, leaf C:N, C:P, and N:P were hardly affected by soil features. Conclusively, lucerne C, N, and P stoichiometry are age- and cut-specific, and regulated mainly by leaf N, P concentrations and stoichiometry. There are few correlations with soil fertility. To our knowledge, it is the first try to elucidate the stoichiometry in the viewpoint of age and cut with a perennial herbaceous legume.Entities:
Keywords: Medicago sativa; alfalfa; cut; ecological stoichiometry; stand age
Year: 2015 PMID: 26697029 PMCID: PMC4673304 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2015.01062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Correlations of C:N, C:P, and N:P with OC, TN, and TP concentrations in leaves of differently aged lucerne stands.
| Cut | C:N | C:P | N:P | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 5 | 8 | 11 | Average (age) | 4 | 5 | 8 | 11 | Average (age) | 4 | 5 | 8 | 11 | Average (age) | ||
| OC | Average (cut) | 0.891∗∗ | 0.711∗ | 0.713∗ | 0.809∗∗ | 0.866∗∗ | 0.816∗∗ | |||||||||
| TN | First | – 0.971∗∗ | – 0.892∗∗ | – 0.740∗∗ | ||||||||||||
| Second | – 0.888∗∗ | 0.709∗ | ||||||||||||||
| Third | – 0.890∗∗ | – 0.709∗ | ||||||||||||||
| Average (cut) | – 0.850∗∗ | – 0.968∗∗ | – 0.691∗ | – 0.865∗∗ | – 0.912∗∗ | – 0.852∗∗ | – 0.898∗∗ | – 0.755∗∗ | – 0.838∗∗ | – 0.704∗ | – 0.481∗∗ | |||||
| TP | First | – 0.893∗∗ | – 0.983∗∗ | – 0.936∗∗ | ||||||||||||
| Second | – 0.813∗∗ | |||||||||||||||
| Third | – 0.680∗ | – 0.961∗∗ | – 0.935∗∗ | |||||||||||||
| Average (cut) | – 0.925∗∗ | – 0.845∗∗ | – 0.773∗∗ | – 0.967∗∗ | – 0.969∗∗ | – 0.980∗∗ | – 0.945∗∗ | – 0.964∗∗ | – 0.986∗∗ | – 0.931∗∗ | – 0.926∗∗ | – 0.947∗∗ | – 0.889∗∗ | |||
Correlations among C:N, C:P, and N:P in leaves of differently aged lucerne stands.
| Cut | C:P | N:P | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 5 | Average (age) | 4 | 5 | 8 | 11 | Average (age) | ||
| C:N | First | 0.881∗∗ | 0.714∗∗ | ||||||
| Second | –0.660∗ | ||||||||
| Third | 0.741∗∗ | ||||||||
| Average (cut) | 0.983∗∗ | 0.892∗∗ | 0.799∗∗ | 0.941∗∗ | 0.476∗∗ | ||||
| C:P | First | 1 | 0.958∗∗ | ||||||
| Third | 1 | 0.940∗∗ | |||||||
| Average (cut) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.986∗∗ | 0.924∗∗ | 0.928∗∗ | 0.844∗∗ | 0.907∗∗ | |
Correlations of leaf C:N, C:P, and N:P with soil OC, NO3- concentrations, and C:P.
| Soil depth (cm) | Cut | Leaf C:N | Leaf C:P | Leaf N:P | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 5 | 8 | Average (age) | 4 | 5 | 11 | Average (age) | 4 | 5 | 11 | Average (age) | |||
| Soil OC | 30–60 | Third | 0.647∗ | |||||||||||
| Average (cut) | 0.396∗ | 0.424∗∗ | 0.339∗ | |||||||||||
| Soil NO3- | 30–60 | First | 0.647∗ | |||||||||||
| Average (cut) | 0.765∗ | 0.796∗ | 0.549∗∗ | 0.856∗∗ | 0.435∗∗ | |||||||||
| Soil C:P | 30–60 | Average (cut) | 0.869∗∗ | 0.329∗ | 0.884∗∗ | – 0.715∗ | 0.689∗ | 0.406∗ | 0.858∗∗ | – 0.792∗ | 0.679∗ | 0.355∗ | ||