Biology and Fertility of Soils

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 73–81

A comparison of soil food webs beneath C3- and C4-dominated grasslands

  • Mathew Dornbush
  • Cynthia Cambardella
  • Elaine Ingham
  • James Raich
Original Paper

Abstract

Soil food webs influence organic matter mineralization and plant nutrient availability, but the potential for plants to capitalize on these processes by altering soil food webs has received little attention. We compared soil food webs beneath C3- and C4-grass plantings by measuring bacterial and fungal biomass and protozoan and nematode abundance repeatedly over 2 years. We tested published expectations that C3 detritus and root chemistry (low lignin/N) favor bacterial-based food webs and root-feeding nematodes, whereas C4 detritus (high lignin/N) and greater production favor fungal decomposers and predatory nematodes. We also hypothesized that seasonal differences in plant growth between the two grassland types would generate season-specific differences in soil food webs. In contrast to our expectations, bacterial biomass and ciliate abundance were greater beneath C4 grasses, and we found no differences in fungi, amoebae, flagellates, or nematodes. Soil food webs varied significantly among sample dates, but differences were unrelated to aboveground plant growth. Our findings, in combination with previous work, suggest that preexisting soil properties moderate the effect of plant inputs on soil food webs. We hypothesize that high levels of soil organic matter provide a stable environment and energy source for soil organisms and thus buffer soil food webs from short-term dynamics of plant communities.

Keywords

Bacteria Fungi Grasslands Nematodes Protozoa 

References

  1. Albers D, Schaefer M, Scheu S (2006) Incorportaion of plant carbon into the soil animal food web on an arable system. Ecology 87:235–245 doi:10.1890/04-1728 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson RV, Coleman DC, Cole CV, Elliott ET (1981) Effect of the nematodes Acrobeloides sp. and Mesodiplogaster lheritieri on substrate utilization and nitrogen and phosphorus mineralization in soil. Ecology 62:549–555 doi:10.2307/1937720 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anonymous (1997) Operator’s manual ANKOM 200/220 fiber analyzer. ANKOM Technology, FairportGoogle Scholar
  4. Babiuk LA, Paul EA (1970) The use of fluorescein isothiocyanate in the determination of the bacterial biomass of a grassland soil. Can J Microbiol 16:57–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Belnap J, Phillips SL (2001) Soil biota in an ungrazed grassland: response to annual grass (Bromus tectorum) invasion. Ecol Appl 11:1261–1275 doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[1261:SBIAUG]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belnap J, Phillips SL, Sherrod SK, Moldenke A (2005) Soil biota can change after exotic plant invasion: does this affect ecosystem processes? Ecology 86:3007–3017 doi:10.1890/05-0333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bottomley PJ (1994) Light microscopic methods for studying soil microorganisms. In: Weaver RW, Angle S, Bottomley P, Bezdicek D, Smith S, Tabatabai A, Wollum A (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Microbiological and biochemical properties. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 81–105Google Scholar
  8. Clarholm M (1985) Interactions of bacteria, protozoa and plants leading to mineralization of soil nitrogen. Soil Biol Biochem 17:181–187 doi:10.1016/0038-0717(85)90113-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Craine JM, Wedin DA, Chapin FS III (1999) Predominance of ecophysiological controls on soil CO2 flux in a Minnesota grassland. Plant Soil 207:77–86 doi:10.1023/A:1004417419288 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craine JM, Lee WG, Bond WJ, Williams RJ, Johnson LC (2005) Envionmental constraints on a global relationship among leaf and root traits of grasses. Ecology 86:12–19 doi:10.1890/04-1075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Deyn GB, Van der Putten WH (2005) Linking aboveground and belowground diversity. Trends Ecol Evol 20:625–633 doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.08.009 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Deyn GB, Raainmakers CE, van Ruijven J, van der Putten FB, van der Putten WH (2004) Plant species identity and diversity effects on different trophic levels of nematodes in the soil food web. Oikos 106:576–586 doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.13265.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DeWitt TA (1984) Soil survey of Story County, Iowa. USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. Dornbush ME, Raich JW (2006) Soil temperature, not aboveground plant productivity, best predicts intra-annual variations of soil respiration in central Iowa grasslands. Ecosystems (N Y, Print) 9:909–920 doi:10.1007/s10021-005-0093-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ehleringer JR (1978) Implications of quantum yield differences on the distributions of C3 and C4 grasses. Oecologia 31:255–267 doi:10.1007/BF00346246 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitter AH, Graves JD, Self GK, Brown TK, Bogie DS, Taylor K (1998) Root production, turnover and respiration under two grassland types along an altitudinal gradient: influence of temperature and solar radiation. Oecologia 114:20–30 doi:10.1007/s004420050415 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fitter AH, Self GK, Brown TK, Bogie DS, Graves JD, Benham D et al (1999) Root production and turnover in an upland grassland subjected to artificial soil warming respond to radiation flux and nutrients, not temperature. Oecologia 120:575–581 doi:10.1007/s004420050892 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goering HK, Van Soest PJ (1970) Forage fiber analysis. United States Department of Agriculture agricultural handbook no. 379. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Ingham ER (1994a) Protozoa. In: Weaver RW, Angle JS, Bottomley PS (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2—Microbiological and biochemical properties. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 491–516Google Scholar
  20. Ingham RE (1994b) Nematodes. In: Weaver RW, Angle JS, Bottomley PS (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2—Microbiological and biochemical properties. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 459–490Google Scholar
  21. Ingham ER, Klein DA (1984) Soil fungi: Relationships between hyphal activity and staining with fluorescein diacetate. Soil Biol Biochem 16:273–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ingham RE, Trofymow JA, Ingham ER, Coleman DC (1985) Interactions of bacteria, fungi, and their nematode grazers: effects on nutrient cycling and plant growth. Ecol Monogr 55:119–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ingham ER, Coleman DC, Moore JC (1989) An analysis of food-web structure and function in a shortgrass prairie, a mountain meadow, and a lodgepole pine forest. Biol Fertil Soils 8:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lenoir L, Persson T, Bengtsson J, Wallander H, Wirén A (2007) Bottom-up or top-down control in forest soil microcosms? Effects of soil fauna on fungal biomass and C/N mineralization. Biol Fert Soils 43:281–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Long SP (1999) Environmental responses. In: Sage RF, Monsen RK (eds) C4 plant biology. Academic, New York, pp 215–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lundgren B (1981) Fluorescein diacetate as a stain of metabolically active bacteria in soil. Oikos 36:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Midwestern Regional Climate Center (2008) Ames 8 WSW, Iowa, Station number 130200. 1971 to 2000. Midwestern Regional Climate Center, Champaign, IL. Available at http://mcc.sws.uiuc.edu/
  28. Moore JC, Berlow EL, Coleman DC, de Ruiter PC, Dong Q, Hastings A, Collins Johnson N, McCann KS, Melville K, Morin PJ, Nadelhoffer K, Rosemond AD, Post DM, Sabo JL, Scow KM, Vanni MJ, Wall DH (2004) Detritus, trophic dynamics and biodiversity. Ecol Lett 7:584–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ode DJ, Tieszen LL (1980) The seasonal contribution of C3 and C4 plant species to primary production in a mixed prairie. Ecology 61:1304–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parker LW, Santos PF, Phillips J, Whitford WG (1984) Carbon and nitrogen dynamics during the decomposition of litter and roots of a Chihuahuan desert annual, Lepidium lasiocarpum. Ecol Monogr 54:339–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paul EA, Clark FE (1996) Soil microbiology and biochemistry, 2nd edn. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Pearcy RW, Ehleringer J (1984) Comparative ecophysiology of C3 and C4 plants. Plant Cell Environ 7:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Porazinska DL, Bardgett RD, Blaauw MB, Hunt W, Parsons AN, Seastedt TR, Wall DH (2003) Relationships at the aboveground–belowground interface: plants, soil biota, and soil processes. Ecol Monogr 73:377–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schultz RC, Colletti JP, Isenhart TM, Marquez CO, Simpkins WW, Ball CJ (2000) Riparian forest buffer practices. In: Garrett HE, Rietveld WJ, Fisher RF (eds) North American agroforestry: an integrated science and practice. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 189–281Google Scholar
  35. Setälä H, Huhta V (1991) Soil fauna increase Betula pendula growth: laboratory experiments with coniferous forest floor. Ecology 72:665–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tufekcioglu A, Raich JW, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2003) Biomass, carbon and nitrogen dynamics of multi-species riparian buffers within an agricultural watershed in Iowa, USA. Agrofor Syst 57:187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Viketoft M, Palmborg C, Sohlenius B, Huss-Danell K, Bengtsson J (2005) Plant species effects on soil nematode communities in experimental grasslands. Appl Soil Ecol 30:90–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vinton MA, Burke IC (1997) Contingent effects of plant species on soils along a regional moisture gradient in the Great Plains. Oecologia 110:393–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wardle DA (2002) Communities and ecosystems: linking the aboveground and belowground components, 1st edn. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  40. Wardle DA, Yeates GW (1993) The dual importance of competition and predation as regulatory forces in terrestrial ecosystems: evidence from decomposer food-webs. Oecologia 93:303–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wardle DA, Bonner KL, Barker GM, Yeates GW, Nicholson KS, Bardgett RD, Watson RN, Ghani A (1999) Plant removals in perennial grassland: vegetation dynamics, decomposers, soil biodiversity, and ecosystem properties. Ecol Monogr 69:535–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wardle DA, Yeates GW, Williamson W, Bonner KI (2003) The response of a three trophic level soil food web to the identity and diversity of plant species and functional groups. Oikois 102:45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wedin DA (1995) Species, nitrogen, and grassland dynamics: the constraints of stuff. In: Jones CG, Lawton JH (eds) Linking species and ecosystems. Chapman and Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Wedin DA, Tilman D (1990) Species effects on nitrogen cycling: a test with perennial grasses. Oecologia 84:433–441Google Scholar
  45. Wilsey BJ, Coleman JS, McNaughton SJ (1997) Effects of elevated CO2 and defoliation on grasses: a comparative ecosystem approach. Ecol Appl 7:844–853Google Scholar
  46. Yeates GW (1987) How plants affect nematodes. Adv Ecol Res 17:61–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yeates GW, Bongers T, De Goede RGM, Freckman DW, Georgieva SS (1993) Feeding habits in soil nematode families and genera—an outline for soil ecologists. J Nematol 25:315–331PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mathew Dornbush
    • 1
  • Cynthia Cambardella
    • 2
  • Elaine Ingham
    • 3
  • James Raich
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Natural and Applied SciencesUniversity of Wisconsin-Green BayGreen BayUSA
  2. 2.USDA/ARS National Soil Tilth LaboratoryAmesUSA
  3. 3.Soil Foodweb, Inc.CorvallisUSA
  4. 4.Department of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal BiologyIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations