| Literature DB >> 29324901 |
Shuaifeng Li1,2, Xuedong Lang1,2, Wande Liu1,2, Guanglong Ou3, Hui Xu3, Jianrong Su1,2.
Abstract
The relationship between biodiversity and biomass is an essential element of the natural ecosystem functioning. Our research aims at assessing the effects of species richness on the aboveground biomass and the ecological driver of this relationship in a primary Pinus kesiya forest. We sampled 112 plots of the primary P. kesiya forests in Yunnan Province. The general linear model and the structural equation model were used to estimate relative effects of multivariate factors among aboveground biomass, species richness and the other explanatory variables, including climate moisture index, soil nutrient regime and stand age. We found a positive linear regression relationship between the species richness and aboveground biomass using ordinary least squares regressions. The species richness and soil nutrient regime had no direct significant effect on aboveground biomass. However, the climate moisture index and stand age had direct effects on aboveground biomass. The climate moisture index could be a better link to mediate the relationship between species richness and aboveground biomass. The species richness affected aboveground biomass which was mediated by the climate moisture index. Stand age had direct and indirect effects on aboveground biomass through the climate moisture index. Our results revealed that climate moisture index had a positive feedback in the relationship between species richness and aboveground biomass, which played an important role in a link between biodiversity maintenance and ecosystem functioning. Meanwhile, climate moisture index not only affected positively on aboveground biomass, but also indirectly through species richness. The information would be helpful in understanding the biodiversity-aboveground biomass relationship of a primary P. kesiya forest and for forest management.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29324901 PMCID: PMC5764369 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The distribution of 112 plots inventoried in the Pinus kesiya primary forest by using ArcGIS 9.3(ESRI,Redlands,CA,USA;http://www.esri.com).
Biomass allometric equations of each component of Pinus kesiya and other broadleaf species.
| Number | Tree species/group | Component | Allometric equation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | trunk | ||
| branch | |||
| needle | |||
| 2 | Aboveground | ||
| 3 | trunk | ||
| Bark | |||
| branch | |||
| Leaf | |||
| 4 | trunk | ||
| branch | |||
| Leaf | |||
| 5 | trunk | ||
| branch | |||
| Leaf | |||
| 6 | Above ground | ||
| 7 | trunk | ||
| bark | |||
| branch | |||
| leaf | |||
| 8 | Other trees | Aboveground | |
| 9 | Shrub and small tree | Aboveground | LN( |
| 10 | Liana | Aboveground |
*Y is the biomass of the tree component (kg), D is the diameter at breast height (cm) and H is the tree height (m) and L is the length of liana (m).
Fig 2Relationship between species richness and aboveground biomass in a primary Pinus kesiya forest.
The red solid line is from multiple OLS regression by adding the cubic term. Gray shaded areas show 95% confidence interval of the fit.
Summary of the general linear models (GLMs) for the relationships between the endogenous variables and predictor variables, each variable separately analyzed.
| Endogenous variables | Sources | Estimate | SE | t-value | Significance Pr(>|t|) | MS | F-value | Significance Pr(>F) | VIF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AGB | Species richness | 0.027 | 0.102 | 0.265 | 0.792 | 2.859 | 26.793 | <0.001 | 1.315 |
| CMI | 1.275 | 0.477 | 2.674 | <0.01 | 5.551 | 52.027 | <0.001 | 1.534 | |
| Nutrient regime | -0.336 | 0.165 | -2.043 | <0.05 | 4.773 | 44.733 | <0.001 | 1.438 | |
| Stand age | 1.603 | 0.205 | 7.812 | <0.001 | 5.511 | 61.02 | <0.001 | 1.671 | |
| Multiple R2 = 0.633; residual SE 0.3266 on 107 d.f. | |||||||||
| CMI | Species richness | 0.089 | 0.019 | 4.727 | <0.001 | 0.168 | 38.664 | <0.001 | 1.09 |
| Nutrient regime | -0.024 | 0.033 | -0.734 | 0.465 | 0.037 | 8.478 | <0.01 | 1.43 | |
| Stand age | 0.128 | 0.04 | 3.245 | <0.01 | 0.046 | 10.531 | <0.01 | 1.522 | |
| Multiple | |||||||||
| Species richness | Nutrient regime | 0.009 | 0.169 | 0.054 | 0.957 | 0.317 | 2.791 | 0.098 | 1.43 |
| Stand age | 0.518 | 0.196 | 2.645 | <0.01 | 0.794 | 0.009 | <0.01 | 1.43 | |
| Multiple | |||||||||
df, degree of freedom; MS, mean square; SE, standard errors; VIF, variance inflation factor.
Fig 3Structural equation models linking aboveground biomass and species richness in the primary Pinus kesiya forest.
(a) Effects of species richness, soil nutrient regime and stand age on aboveground biomass. (b) Effects of species richness, soil nutrient regime, stand age and climate moisture index on aboveground biomass. (c) and (d) The model with climate moisture index as the linking mechanism. The coefficients are standardized prediction coefficients indicate each path. Solid lines represent significant paths (P<0.05) and dash lines indicate non-significant paths (P≥0.05).
Direct, indirect and total standardized effects on AGB based on structural equation models.
| SEM model | Predictor | Pathway to above-ground biomass | effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| A model in | Species richness | Direct | 0.092 |
| Nutrient regime | Direct | -0.157 | |
| Indirect through species diversity | 0.001 | ||
| Total effect | -0.156 | ||
| Stand age | Direct | 0.652** | |
| Indirect through species richness | 0.027 | ||
| Total effect | 0.678*** | ||
| A model in | Species richness | Direct | 0.018 |
| Nutrient regime | Direct | -0.143* | |
| Indirect through species richness | 0.001 | ||
| Total effect | -0.143* | ||
| Stand age | Direct | 0.591*** | |
| Indirect through species richness | 0.002 | ||
| Total effect | 0.593*** | ||
| CMI | Direct | 0.194** | |
| Indirect through species richness | 0.008 | ||
| Total effect | 0.202** | ||
| B model in | CMI | Direct | 0.194** |
| Species richness | Direct | 0.018 | |
| Indirect through CMI | 0.074* | ||
| Total effect | 0.92 | ||
| Nutrient regime | Direct | -0.143 | |
| Indirect through CMI | -0.013 | ||
| Indirect through species richness | -0.001 | ||
| Total effect | -0.157 | ||
| Stand age | Direct | 0.591*** | |
| Indirect through CMI | 0.06* | ||
| Indirect through species richness | 0.005 | ||
| Total effect | 0.657*** | ||
| C model in | CMI | Direct | 0.194** |
| Indirect through species richness | 0.008 | ||
| Total effect | 0.202*** | ||
| Species richness | Direct | 0.018 | |
| Nutrient regime | Direct | -0.143* | |
| Indirect through CMI | -0.013 | ||
| Indirect through species richness | 0.001 | ||
| Total effect | -0.156* | ||
| Stand age | Direct | 0.591*** | |
| Indirect through CMI | 0.082* | ||
| Indirect through species richness | 0.002 | ||
| Total effect | 0.675*** |
Significant effects are at P<0.05(*), P<0.01(**), and P<0.001(***).