| Literature DB >> 30455714 |
Feng Li1,2,3, Cong Hu1,2, Yonghong Xie1,2, Wenzhi Liu3, Xinsheng Chen1,2, Zhengmiao Deng1,2, Zhiyong Hou1,2.
Abstract
class="Chemical">Phosphorus (P) enrichment as a result of anthroclass="Chemical">pogenic activities can class="Chemical">potentially alter class="Chemical">plant C:N:P stoichiometry. However, the influence of different P enrichment frequencies on class="Chemical">plant C:N:P stoichiometry in P-limited ecosystems is still unclear. In this study, we conducted a P-addition exclass="Chemical">periment to elucidate the effect of various P enrichment frequencies on the class="Chemical">plant C:N:P stoichiometry of Carex brevicusclass="Chemical">pis in a freshEntities:
Keywords: Carex brevicuspis; P enrichment frequency; biomass accumulation; biomass allocation; plant C:N:P stoichiometry
Year: 2018 PMID: 30455714 PMCID: PMC6231420 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01608
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
FIGURE 1Dongting Lake, showing the location of the study site. The shaded areas represent the wetlands.
Soil characteristics (mean ± SE) after different P addition frequency treatments (treatments A–D represent: no P addition treatment; three – time P addition treatment; two-time P addition treatment; and one-time P addition treatment, respectively).
| Treatments | Total nitrogen content (mg g−1) | Total phosphorus content (mg g−1) | Organic carbon content (mg g−1) | C:N | C:P | N:P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.87 ± 0.02a | 0.73 ± 0.01b | 7.07 ± 0.14 | 8.20 ± 0.14b | 9.69 ± 0.15 | 1.18 ± 0.02a |
| B | 0.82 ± 0.02ab | 0.77 ± 0.01ab | 7.23 ± 0.15 | 8.87 ± 0.14ab | 9.42 ± 0.17 | 1.07 ± 0.03ab |
| C | 0.79 ± 0.05ab | 0.79 ± 0.02a | 7.14 ± 0.25 | 9.25 ± 0.42a | 9.11 ± 0.34 | 1.00 ± 0.06bc |
| D | 0.72 ± 0.04b | 0.77 ± 0.02ab | 6.87 ± 0.24 | 9.64 ± 0.25a | 8.92 ± 0.33 | 0.94 ± 0.05c |
FIGURE 2Biomass accumulation (A) and allocation (B) of Carex brevicuspis (means ± standard errors, n = 7) under different P addition frequencies (treatments A–D represent: no P addition treatment; three - time P addition treatment; two-time P addition treatment; and one-time P addition treatment, respectively). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments at the 0.05 significance level.
FIGURE 3Foliar ecological stoichiometry (A–F) of Carex brevicuspis (means ± standard errors, n = 7) under different P addition frequencies (treatments A–D represent: no P addition treatment; three - time P addition treatment; two-time P addition treatment; and one-time P addition treatment, respectively). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments at the 0.05 significance level.
FIGURE 4Root ecological stoichiometry (A–F) of Carex brevicuspis (means ± standard errors, n = 7) under different P addition frequencies (treatments A–D represent: no P addition treatment; three - time P addition treatment; two-time P addition treatment; and one-time P addition treatment, respectively). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments at the 0.05 significance level.