| Literature DB >> 30716078 |
Daniel B Hewins1, Hanna Lee2, Paul W Barnes3, Nathan G McDowell4, William T Pockman5, Thom Rahn6, Heather L Throop7,8.
Abstract
Dryland ecosystems cover nearly 45% of the Earth's land area and account for large proportions of terrestrial net primary production and carbon pools. However, predicting rates of plant litter decomposition in these vast ecosystems has proven challenging due to their distinctly dry and often hot climate regimes, and potentially unique physical drivers of decomposition. In this study, we elucidated the role of photopriming, i.e. exposure of standing dead leaf litter to solar radiation prior to litter drop that would chemically change litter and enhance biotic decay of fallen litter. We exposed litter substrates to three different UV radiation treatments simulating three-months of UV radiation exposure in southern New Mexico: no light, UVA+UVB+Visible, and UVA+Visible. There were three litter types: mesquite leaflets (Prosopis glandulosa, litter with high nitrogen (N) concentration), filter paper (pure cellulose), and basswood (Tilia spp, high lignin concentration). We deployed the photoprimed litter in the field within a large scale precipitation manipulation experiment: ∼50% precipitation reduction, ∼150% precipitation addition, and ambient control. Our results revealed the importance of litter substrate, particularly N content, for overall decomposition in drylands, as neither filter paper nor basswood exhibited measurable mass loss over the course of the year-long study, while high N-containing mesquite litter exhibited potential mass loss. We saw no effect of photopriming on subsequent microbial decay. We did observe a precipitation effect on mesquite where the rate of decay was more rapid in ambient and precipitation addition treatments than in the drought treatment. Overall, we found that precipitation and N played a critical role in litter mass loss. In contrast, photopriming had no detected effects on mass loss over the course of our year-long study. These results underpin the importance of biotic-driven decomposition, even in the presence of photopriming, for understanding litter decomposition and biogeochemical cycles in drylands.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30716078 PMCID: PMC6361422 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210470
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary of mean decay constants (k-values) and associated standard errors (SE; ±) estimated by fitting a single exponential decay function to litter mass loss data.
Values are categorized by each litter type by photopriming by precipitation treatment combination used in the study.
| Litter | Photopriming | Precipitation | SE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drought | -0.03 | 0.03 | ||
| Dark | Ambient | -0.02 | 0.02 | |
| Addition | -0.05 | 0.05 | ||
| Drought | -0.05 | 0.07 | ||
| Cellulose paper | -UVB | Ambient | -0.02 | 0.04 |
| Addition | -0.04 | 0.06 | ||
| Drought | -0.01 | 0.07 | ||
| +UVB | Ambient | -0.04 | 0.03 | |
| Addition | -0.02 | 0.08 | ||
| Drought | 0.96 | 0.15 | ||
| Dark | Ambient | 1.35 | 0.19 | |
| Addition | 1.39 | 0.11 | ||
| Drought | 0.87 | 0.13 | ||
| Mesquite | -UVB | Ambient | 1.37 | 0.11 |
| Addition | 1.40 | 0.09 | ||
| Drought | 0.84 | 0.15 | ||
| +UVB | Ambient | 1.43 | 0.06 | |
| Addition | 1.33 | 0.18 | ||
| Drought | 0.01 | 0.03 | ||
| Dark | Ambient | 0.02 | 0.04 | |
| Addition | 0.02 | 0.06 | ||
| Drought | 0.04 | 0.04 | ||
| Basswood | -UVB | Ambient | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| Addition | 0.07 | 0.09 | ||
| Drought | 0.04 | 0.08 | ||
| +UVB | Ambient | 0.01 | 0.03 | |
| Addition | 0.01 | 0.05 |
Fig 1Decay curves of cellulose paper (cell), mesquite (mes), and basswood (wood) under each of the three precipitation treatments including the drought, ambient, and addition manipulations.
Symbol shape and fill combinations indicate different litter types. The three exponential decay curves are fitted to mesquite litter as it was the only litter type to show measurable mass loss over the course of the experiment. Mesquite mass loss was reduced under drought (dashed line) relative to ambient (solid line) and precipitation addition (dotted line) treatments. Error bars are standard error.
Summary of ANOVA model results testing the effects of litter types, photopriming (Pp), precipitation manipulations (PPT), and their interactions on decay constants (kvalues over the course of the experiment).
Degrees of freedom (DF) are numerator and denominator respectively, F-Value is the computed test statistic, and P-Value is the asymptotic significance.
| Treatments | DF | F-Value | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Litter type | 2, 52 | 61.55 | <0.0001 |
| Photopriming (Pp) | 2, 52 | 0.04 | 0.96 |
| Precipitation (PPT) | 2, 52 | 0.08 | 0.93 |
| Litter x Pp | 4, 52 | 0.24 | 0.91 |
| Litter x PPT | 4, 52 | 6.99 | 0.0001 |
| Pp x PPT | 4, 52 | 0.08 | 0.99 |
| Litter x Pp x PPT | 8, 52 | 0.20 | 0.99 |
Fig 2Carbon (A) and nitrogen (B) mass remaining (%) regressed against ash-free dry mass remaining (%) of litter used in this study.
Solid lines are 1:1 relationships and the dashed lines are regression lines fitted to the data. Different shape and fill combinations indicate different precipitation and litter type combinations.
Simple linear regression results of the relationship between ash-free dry mass remaining (%) of mesquite litter and mass remaining (%) of carbon and nitrogen of mesquite litter for each of the three precipitation manipulation treatments.
Cellulose and basswood were not included in this analysis due to their negligible decomposition.
| Mesquite Litter | Carbon Mass Remaining | Nitrogen Mass Remaining | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precipitation Treatments | R2 | AICc | P | R2 | AICc | P |
| Drought (-) | 0.79 | 335.3 | 0.002 | 0.52 | 369.4 | 0.2 |
| Ambient | 0.91 | 302.9 | <0.001 | 0.91 | 295.6 | <0.001 |
| Addition (+) | 0.93 | 303.8 | <0.001 | 0.92 | 297.3 | <0.001 |