| Literature DB >> 32737568 |
Soni Lama1, Andre Velescu1, Sophia Leimer2, Alexandra Weigelt3,4, Hongmei Chen3, Nico Eisenhauer3,4, Stefan Scheu5, Yvonne Oelmann6, Wolfgang Wilcke1.
Abstract
Gross rates of nitrogen (Entities:
Keywords: 15N isotopic pool dilution; Biodiversity; C:N ratio; N cycling; The Jena Experiment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32737568 PMCID: PMC7406533 DOI: 10.1007/s00442-020-04717-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oecologia ISSN: 0029-8549 Impact factor: 3.225
Maximum, minimum and mean values of gross and net nitrogen transformation rates
| N transformation rates [µg N (g dry soil)−1 day−1] | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | Maximum | Mean | |
| Gross N mineralization | 0.04 | 6.20 | 2.12 |
| Microbial ammonium consumption | − 1.81 | 7.24 | 2.43 |
| Gross inorganic N immobilization | − 3.27 | 8.51 | 2.28 |
| Net N mineralization | − 4.33 | 5.72 | − 0.12 |
| Net ammonification | − 2.57 | 2.13 | − 0.42 |
| Net nitrification | − 2.04 | 4.97 | 0.31 |
Hierarchical ANOVA results showing the effects of plant species richness (SR) and presence ( +)/absence (−) of each functional group on gross nitrogen mineralization rates
| Source | SS | SS (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grasses | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.845 |
| Tall herbs | 1 | 0.26 | 1.95 | 1.68 | 0.199 |
| Small herbs | 1 | 0.31 | 2.33 | 2.05 | 0.157 |
| Residuals | 65 | 9.96 |
Bold letters show significance at p < 0.05. Arrows indicate positive (↑) or negative (↓) effects
Fig. 1Relationship between plant species richness with/without legumes and gross nitrogen (N) mineralization. Open circles represent plots without legumes and closed circles represent plots with legumes. The regression lines are shown for illustration purpose only
Hierarchical ANOVA results showing the effects of plant species richness (SR) and presence ( +)/absence (−) of each functional group on microbial ammonium consumption rates
| Source | SS | SS (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Block | 3 | 0.14 | 4.52 | 1.41 | 0.249 |
| Grasses | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.002 | 0.963 |
| Tall herbs | 1 | 0.04 | 1.29 | 1.17 | 0.283 |
| Residuals | 65 | 2.08 |
Bold letters show significance at p < 0.05. Arrows indicate positive (↑) or negative (↓) effects
Fig. 2Relationship between (a) plant species richness with/without legumes and (b) plant species richness with/without small herbs and microbial ammonium (NH4+) consumption rates. Open circles represent plots without legumes/small herbs and closed circles represent plots with legumes/small herbs. The regression lines are shown for illustration purpose only
Hierarchical ANOVA results showing the effects of plant species richness (SR) and presence ( +)/absence (−) of each functional group on gross inorganic N immobilization rates
| Source | SS | SS (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Block | 3 | 14.59 | 5.08 | 1.40 | 0.250 |
| SR | 1 | 1.64 | 0.56 | 0.47 | 0.494 |
| Grasses | 1 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.845 |
| Tall herbs | 1 | 5.62 | 1.96 | 1.62 | 0.207 |
| Residuals | 65 | 225.07 |
Bold letters show significance at p < 0.05 and italics show significance at p < 0.1. Arrows indicate positive (↑) effects
Fig. 3Effects of presence/absence of (a) legumes and (b) small herbs on gross inorganic N immobilization rates. p value is given according to the ANOVA results
Fig. 4(a) pH, (b) microbial carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio, (c) shoot C:N ratio, and (d) fine root C:N ratio versus gross nitrogen mineralization rates. p and r values refer to results from the Pearson’s correlation test. The regression lines are shown for illustration purpose only
Fig. 5(a) Microbial biomass C, (b) microbial carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio, (c) shoot C:N ratio, and (d) soil C:N ratio versus microbial ammonium (NH4+) consumption rates. p and r values refer to results from the Pearson’s correlation test. The regression lines are shown for illustration purpose only. Solid lines indicate significance at p < 0.05 and a dashed line indicates significance at p < 0.1
Fig. 6(a) Microbial biomass C, (b) microbial carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio, (c) total soil nitrogen concentrations, and (d) soil organic carbon concentrations versus gross inorganic N immobilization rates. p and r values refer to results from the Pearson’s correlation test. The regression lines are shown for illustration purpose only. Solid lines indicate significance at p < 0.05 and the dotted line indicates significance at p < 0.1
Fig. 7Structural equation model (SEM) to illustrate the underlying paths via which plant species richness and functional groups influenced gross N mineralization and microbial ammonium (NH4+) consumption rates. Solid and dashed thick arrows represent positive and negative significant relationships, respectively. Solid thin arrow shows a non-significant pathway. Dashed thin arrows indicate non-significant pathways that were excluded from the final model. Numbers on the arrows give standardized path coefficients with their significance indicated as ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, •p < 0.01. Numbers below the variables show the percentage variation explained by corresponding variables (R2). Fit indices of the model are shown in Table S4
Fig. 8Relationship between mean regenerative shoot height (i.e., soil surface to highest flower) of the vegetation (of the year 2011) and mean fine root C:N ratios (of the year 2013)