Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 178, Issue 3, pp 887–897 | Cite as

Nitrogen, phosphorus, and cation use efficiency in stands of regenerating tropical dry forest

  • Bonnie G. WaringEmail author
  • Justin M. Becknell
  • Jennifer S. Powers
Ecosystem ecology - Original research

Abstract

Plants on infertile soils exhibit physiological and morphological traits that support conservative internal nutrient cycling. However, potential trade-offs among use efficiencies for N, P, and cations are not well explored in species-rich habitats where multiple elements may limit plant production. We examined uptake efficiency and use efficiency of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Al, and Na in plots of regenerating tropical dry forests spanning a gradient of soil fertility. Our aim was to determine whether plant responses to multiple elements are correlated, or whether there are trade-offs among exploitation strategies across stands varying in community composition, soil quality, and successional stage. For all elements, both uptake efficiency and use efficiency decreased as availability of the corresponding element increased. Plant responses to N, Na, and Al were uncoupled from uptake and use efficiencies for P and essential base cations, which were tightly correlated. N and P use efficiencies were associated with shifts in plant species composition along the soil fertility gradient, and there was also a trend towards increasing N use efficiency with stand age. N uptake efficiency was positively correlated with the abundance of tree species that associate with ectomycorrhizal fungi. Taken together, our results suggest that successional processes and local species composition interact to regulate plant responses to availability of multiple resources. Successional tropical dry forests appear to employ different strategies to maximize response to N vs. P and K.

Keywords

Ectomycorrhizae Nutrient use efficiency Nutrient limitation Productivity Succession 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Roger Blanco and Maria Marta Chavarria of the Área de Conservación Guanacaste for logistical support and Daniel Peréz-Aviles for excellent help in the field. We also thank two anonymous reviewers for comments that improved this paper. This study was funded by National Science Foundation CAREER grant DEB-1053237 to J. S. P.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

442_2015_3283_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (164 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 164 kb)

References

  1. Aerts R, Chapin FS (1999) The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: a re-evaluation of processes and patterns. Adv Ecol Res 30:1–67Google Scholar
  2. Ashton I, Miller A, Bowman W, Suding K (2010) Niche complementarity due to plasticity in resource use: plant partitioning of chemical N forms. Ecology 91:3252–3260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Averill C, Finzi A (2011) Increasing plant use of organic nitrogen with elevation is reflected in nitrogen uptake rates and ecosystem δ15N. Ecology 92:883–891PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bazzaz FA, Pickett STA (1980) Physiological ecology of tropical succession: a comparative review. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:287–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becknell JM, Powers JS (2014) Stand age and soils as drivers of plant functional traits and aboveground biomass in secondary tropical dry forest. Can J For Res 44:603–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloom AJ, Chapin FS III, Mooney HA (1985) Resource limitation in plants—an economic analogy. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 16:363–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bobbink R, Hicks K, Galloway J, Spranger T, Alkemade R, Ashmore M et al (2010) Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. Ecol Appl 20:30–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bridgham S, Pastor J, McClaugherty C, Richardson C (1995) Nutrient-use efficiency: a litterfall index a model and a test along a nutrient-availability gradient in North Carolina peatlands. Am Nat 145:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapin FS (1980) The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:233–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chrispeels M, Crawford N, Schroeder J (1999) Proteins for transport of water and mineral nutrients across the membranes of plant cells. Plant Cell 11:661–675PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark R, Zeto S (2000) Mineral acquisition by arbuscular mycorrhizal plants. J Plant Nutr 23:867–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cleveland C, Townsend AR, Schmidt SK, Constance BC (2003) Soil microbial dynamics and biogeochemistry in tropical forests and pastures southwestern Costa Rica. Ecol Appl 13:314–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleveland C, Townsend A, Taylor P, Alvarez-Clare S, Bustamante M, Chuyong G et al (2011) Relationships among net primary productivity nutrients and climate in tropical rain forest: a pan-tropical analysis. Ecol Lett 14:939–947PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cooperband LR, Logan TJ (1994) Measuring in situ changes in labile soil phosphorus with anion-exchange membranes. SSSAJ 58:105–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davidson E, de Carvalho C, Vieira I, Figueiredo R, Moutinho P, Yoko Ishida F et al (2004) Nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of biomass growth in a tropical secondary forest. Ecol Appl 14:150–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davidson E, De Carvalho C, Figueira A, Ishida F, Ometto J, Nardoto G et al (2007) Recuperation of nitrogen cycling in Amazonian forests following agricultural abandonment. Nature 447:995–998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. do Rosario-Oliveira M, van Noordwijk M, Gaze SR, Brouwer G, Bona S et al (2000) Auger sampling ingrowth cores and pinboard methods. In: Smit AL, Bengough AG, Engels C, van Noordwijk M, Pellerin S, van de Geijn SC (eds) Root methods: a handbook. Springer, Berlin, pp 176–206Google Scholar
  18. Eamus D (1999) Ecophysiological traits of deciduous and evergreen woody species in the seasonally dry tropics. Trends Ecol Evol 14:11–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farrior C, Tilman D, Dybzinski R, Reich P, Levin S, Pacala S (2013) Resource limitation in a competitive context determines complex plant responses to experimental resource additions. Ecology 94:2505–2517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gahoonia T, Claassen N, Jungk A (1992) Mobilization of phosphate in different soils by ryegrass supplied with ammonium or nitrate. Plant Soil 140:241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gotsch S, Powers J, Lerdau M (2010) Leaf traits and water relations of 12 evergreen species in Costa Rican wet and dry forests: patterns of intra-specific variation across forests and seasons. Plant Ecol 211:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gower ST, McMurtrie RE, Murty D (1996) Aboveground net primary production decline with stand age: potential causes. Trends Ecol Evol 11:378–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gray JT, Schlesinger WH (1983) Nutrient use by evergreen and deciduous shrubs in southern California. J Ecol 71:43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harpole W, Ngai J, Cleland E, Seabloom E, Borer E, Bracken M et al (2011) Nutrient co-limitation of primary producer communities. Ecol Lett 14:852–862PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hayes P, Turner B, Lambers H, Laliberte E (2014) Foliar nutrient concentrations and resorption efficiency in plants of contrasting nutrient-acquisition strategies along a 2-million-year dune chronosequence. J Ecol 102:396–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hietz H, Turner BL, Wanek W, Richter A, Nock CA, Wright SJ (2011) Long–term change in the nitrogen cycle of tropical forests. Science 334:664–666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hinsinger P, Plassard C, Tang C, Jaillard B (2003) Origins of root—mediated pH changes in the rhizosphere and their responses to environmental constraints: a review. Plant Soil 248:43–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jackson L, Burger M, Cavagnaro T (2008) Roots nitrogen transformations and ecosystem services. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:341–363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaye JP, Hart SC (1997) Competition for nitrogen between plants and soil microorganisms. Trends Ecol Evol 12:139–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kissing L, Powers J (2010) Coarse woody debris stocks as a function of forest type and stand age in Costa Rican tropical dry forest: long-lasting legacies of previous land use. J Trop Ecol 26:467–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kitayama KE, Schuur AG, Drake DR, Mueller-Dombois D (2000) Soil phosphorus fractionation and phosphorus–use efficiencies of tropical rain forests along altitudinal gradients of Mount Kinabalu, Borneo. Oecologia 123:342–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Knops J, Koenig W, Nash T III (1997) On the relationship between nutrient use efficiency and fertility in forest ecosystems. Oecologia 110:550–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu K, Luan S (2001) Internal aluminum block of plant inward K+ channels. Plant Cell 13:1453–1466PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lü XT, Reed S, Yu Q, He NP, Wang ZW, Han XG (2013) Convergent responses of nitrogen and phosphorus resorption to nitrogen inputs in a semiarid grassland. Glob Change Biol 19:2775–2784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lynch J (1995) Root architecture and nutrient acquisition. Plant Physiol 109:7–13PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB et al (2013) Vegan: community ecology package for RGoogle Scholar
  37. Ordoñez J, Van Bodegom P, Witte JP, Wright I, Reich P, Aerts R (2009) A global study of relationships between leaf traits climate and soil measures of nutrient fertility. Global Ecol Biogeogr 18:137–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ouedraogo DY, Mortier F, Gourlet-Fleury S, Freycon V, Picard N (2013) Slow-growing species cope best with drought: evidence from long-term measurements in a tropical semi-deciduous moist forest of Central Africa. J Ecol 101:1459–1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Paoli G, Curran L, Zak D (2005) Phosphorus efficiency of Bornean rain forest productivity: evidence against the unimodal efficiency hypothesis. Ecology 86:1548–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pastor J, Bridgham S (1999) Nutrient efficiency along nutrient availability gradients. Oecologia 118:50–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Phillips R, Brzostek E, Midgley M (2013) The mycorrhizal-associated nutrient economy: a new framework for predicting carbon–nutrient couplings in temperate forests. New Phytol 199:41–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Poorter L, Bongers L, Bongers F (2006) Architecture of 54 moist–forest tree species: traits trade-offs and functional groups. Ecology 87:1289–1301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Powers J, Peréz-Aviles D (2013) Edaphic factors are a more important control on surface fine roots than stand age in secondary tropical dry forests. Biotropica 45:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Powers J, Tiffin P (2010) Plant functional type classification in tropical dry forests in Costa Rica: leaf habit versus taxonomic approaches. Funct Ecol 24:927–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Powers J, Becknell J, Irving J, Perez-Aviles D (2009) Diversity and structure of regenerating tropical dry forests in Costa Rica: geographic patterns and environmental drivers. For Ecol Manage 258:959–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Qian P, Schoenau JJ (1995) Assessing nitrogen mineralization from soil organic matter using anion exchange membranes. Fertil Res 40:143–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reed S, Townsend A, Davidson E, Cleveland C (2012) Stoichiometric patterns in foliar nutrient resorption across multiple scales. New Phytol 196:173–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reich P (2014) The worldwide fast–slow plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto. J Ecol 102:275–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schimel J, Bennett J (2004) Nitrogen mineralization: challenges of a changing paradigm. Ecology 85:591–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Silver W (1994) Is nutrient availability related to plant nutrient use in humid tropical forests? Oecologia 98:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smil V (2000) Phosphorus in the environment: natural flows and human interfaces. Annu Rev Energy Environ 25:53–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. ten Hoopen F, Cuin T, Pedas P, Hegelund J, Shabala S, Schjoerring J et al (2010) Competition between uptake of ammonium and potassium in barley and Arabidopsis roots: molecular mechanisms and physiological consequences. J Exp Bot 61:2303–2315PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tilman D, Kilham S, Kilham P (1982) Phytoplankton community ecology: the role of limiting nutrients. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 13:349–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Townsend A, Cleveland C, Houlton B, Alden C, White J (2011) Multi–element regulation of the tropical forest carbon cycle. Front Ecol Environ 9:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. van Breugel M, Ransijn J, Craven D, Bongers F, Hall JS (2011) Estimating carbon stock in secondary forests: decisions and uncertainties associated with allometric biomass models. For Ecol Manage 262:1648–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vitousek P (1982) Nutrient cycling and nutrient use efficiency. Am Nat 65:285–298Google Scholar
  57. Vitousek P (1984) Litterfall nutrient cycling and nutrient limitation in tropical forests. Ecology 65:285–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Vitousek PM, Aber JD, Howarth RW, Likens GE, Matson PA, Schindler DW et al (1997) Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol Appl 7:737–750Google Scholar
  59. Wedin D, Tilman D (1993) Competition among grasses along a nitrogen gradient: initial conditions and mechanisms of competition. Ecol Monogr 63:199–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Whiteside M, Treseder K, Atsatt P (2009) The brighter side of soils: quantum dots track organic nitrogen through fungi and plants. Ecology 90:100–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wright S, Yavitt J, Wurzburger N, Turner B, Tanner E, Sayer E et al (2011) Potassium phosphorus or nitrogen limit root allocation tree growth or litter production in a lowland tropical forest. Ecology 92:1616–1625PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bonnie G. Waring
    • 1
    Email author
  • Justin M. Becknell
    • 2
  • Jennifer S. Powers
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of MinnesotaSt PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of MinnesotaSt PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations