Martin Joseph Wassen1, Julian Schrader2,3, Jerry van Dijk4, Maarten Boudewijn Eppinga5. 1. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. M.J.Wassen@uu.nl. 2. Biodiversity, Macroecology & Biogeography, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany. 3. Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 5. Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
The greater bioavailability of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) in the Anthropocene has strongly impacted terrestrial plant communities. In northwest Europe, because high N deposition is considered the main driver of plant diversity loss, European Union (EU) legislation to reduce N deposition is expected to promote plant species recovery. However, this expectation is simplistic: it ignores the role of other macronutrients. Analysing the relationship between plant species pools and species stoichiometric niches along nutrient gradients across northern Eurasia's herbaceous ecosystems, we found that both absolute and relative P availability are more critical than N or K availability. This result is consistent with stoichiometric niche theory, and with findings from studies of hyperdiverse forests and shrublands at lower latitudes. We show that ecosystems with low absolute and relative P availability harbour a unique set of threatened species that have narrower nutrient-based niche widths than non-threatened species. Such ecosystems represent a conservation priority, but may be further threatened by latent effects of relative P enrichment arising from reduction of N availability without simultaneous reduction of P. The narrow focus of EU legislation on reducing N, but not P, may therefore inadvertently increase the threat to many of Europe's already threatened plant species. An EU Phosphate Directive is needed.
The greater bioavailability of n class="Chemical">nitrogen (n class="Chemical">N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) in the Anthropocene has strongly impacted terrestrial plant communities. In northwest Europe, because high N deposition is considered the main driver of plant diversity loss, European Union (EU) legislation to reduce N deposition is expected to promote plant species recovery. However, this expectation is simplistic: it ignores the role of other macronutrients. Analysing the relationship between plant species pools and species stoichiometric niches along nutrient gradients across northern Eurasia's herbaceous ecosystems, we found that both absolute and relative P availability are more critical than N or K availability. This result is consistent with stoichiometric niche theory, and with findings from studies of hyperdiverse forests and shrublands at lower latitudes. We show that ecosystems with low absolute and relative P availability harbour a unique set of threatened species that have narrower nutrient-based niche widths than non-threatened species. Such ecosystems represent a conservation priority, but may be further threatened by latent effects of relative P enrichment arising from reduction of N availability without simultaneous reduction of P. The narrow focus of EU legislation on reducing N, but not P, may therefore inadvertently increase the threat to many of Europe's already threatened plant species. An EU Phosphate Directive is needed.
Authors: R Bobbink; K Hicks; J Galloway; T Spranger; R Alkemade; M Ashmore; M Bustamante; S Cinderby; E Davidson; F Dentener; B Emmett; J-W Erisman; M Fenn; F Gilliam; A Nordin; L Pardo; W De Vries Journal: Ecol Appl Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.657
Authors: Will Steffen; Katherine Richardson; Johan Rockström; Sarah E Cornell; Ingo Fetzer; Elena M Bennett; Reinette Biggs; Stephen R Carpenter; Wim de Vries; Cynthia A de Wit; Carl Folke; Dieter Gerten; Jens Heinke; Georgina M Mace; Linn M Persson; Veerabhadran Ramanathan; Belinda Reyers; Sverker Sörlin Journal: Science Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Etienne Laliberté; James B Grace; Michael A Huston; Hans Lambers; François P Teste; Benjamin L Turner; David A Wardle Journal: Trends Ecol Evol Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 17.712
Authors: W Stanley Harpole; Jacqueline T Ngai; Elsa E Cleland; Eric W Seabloom; Elizabeth T Borer; Matthew E S Bracken; James J Elser; Daniel S Gruner; Helmut Hillebrand; Jonathan B Shurin; Jennifer E Smith Journal: Ecol Lett Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 9.492
Authors: James N Galloway; Alan R Townsend; Jan Willem Erisman; Mateete Bekunda; Zucong Cai; John R Freney; Luiz A Martinelli; Sybil P Seitzinger; Mark A Sutton Journal: Science Date: 2008-05-16 Impact factor: 47.728