| Literature DB >> 28332608 |
Oriol Grau1,2, Josep Peñuelas1,2, Bruno Ferry3, Vincent Freycon4, Lilian Blanc4, Mathilde Desprez5, Christopher Baraloto6, Jérôme Chave7, Laurent Descroix8, Aurélie Dourdain5, Stéphane Guitet9, Ivan A Janssens10, Jordi Sardans1,2, Bruno Hérault5.
Abstract
Tropical forests store large amounts of biomass despite they generally grow in nutrient-poor soils, suggesting that the role of soil characteristics in the structure and dynamics of tropical forests is complex. We used data for >34 000 trees from several permanent plots in French Guiana to investigate if soil characteristics could predict the structure (tree diameter, density and aboveground biomass), and dynamics (growth, mortality, aboveground wood productivity) of nutrient-poor tropical forests. Most variables did not covary with site-level changes in soil nutrient content, indicating that nutrient-cycling mechanisms other than the direct absorption from soil (e.g. the nutrient uptake from litter, the resorption, or the storage of nutrients in the biomass), may strongly control forest structure and dynamics. Ecosystem-level adaptations to low soil nutrient availability and long-term low levels of disturbance may help to account for the lower productivity and higher accumulation of biomass in nutrient-poor forests compared to nutrient-richer forests.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28332608 PMCID: PMC5362906 DOI: 10.1038/srep45017
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Position of French Guiana in South America (left) and location of study sites (right) within the Guyafor network.
The geological substrate and the mean annual precipitation of the study sites are also indicated. In Nouragues two different study sites (Grand Plateau and Petit Plateau) were included in this study (see Table S1). The figure was made by Quantum GIS Geographic Information System v. 2.16 (QGIS Development Team, 2016. QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://www.qgis.org/) by the authors using own data from UMR Ecofog (Kourou).
Figure 2(a) Distribution of the study sites and (b) position of the variables of forest structure and forest dynamics in a Principal Component Analysis.
Figure 3Partial residuals of (a) quadratic diameter vs soil C:N ratio and (b) quadratic diameter vs litter total K content. Abbreviations in the legend are detailed in Table S1.
Figure 4Aboveground biomass vs soil C:N ratio.
Abbreviations in the legend are detailed in Table S1.
Figure 5Partial residuals of (a) stem density vs total P content in soil, (b) stem density vs soil pH, and (c) stem density vs litter N:P ratio. Abbreviations in the legend are detailed in Table S1.
Figure 6Inferred Bayesian network illustrating the relationships between the forest-structure variables (green), the forest-dynamic variables (grey), and the predictors (blue).
The regression coefficients indicate a positive (black numbers) or negative (red numbers) relationship at each node; only those predictors with a statistically significant effect (Table S4) were included. Substituting litter K content with litter N or P content or substituting total soil P content with total soil N or K content (in brackets) produces nearly identical results because of their high mutual correlations (see Table S5).