Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 9, Issue 5, pp 740–755 | Cite as

Plasticity in Resource Allocation and Nitrogen-use Efficiency in Riparian Vegetation: Implications for Nitrogen Retention

  • John D. SchadeEmail author
  • David B. Lewis
Article

Abstract

In this work, we summarize our current understanding of the function of riparian zones and describe an investigation of changes in the production per unit nitrogen (N) taken up, or nitrogen-use efficiency (NUE) and resource allocation of a riparian shrub in response to changes in N availability. Empirical work included measuring leaf %N and root-to-shoot ratios (R:S) of individual riparian shrubs (Baccharis salicifolia, or seepwillow) growing at a range of N availabilities in the field and growing in fertilized and unfertilized plots in a field fertilization experiment. In both observational and experimental work, N availability was related positively to %N of plant tissues and negatively to R:S. We used a simulation model to investigate feedbacks between seepwillow responses to and effects on N availability. In the model, plasticity in resource allocation and NUE in response to changes in N led to lower productivity at low N supply and higher productivity and lower retention at high N supply than was observed in plants constrained to a constant %N and R:S. Furthermore, uptake became relatively more important as a retention mechanism when plants responded to high N supply. These feedbacks could have significant effects on N retention by riparian zones in watersheds receiving large fertilizer inputs of N or on ecosystems exposed to high rates of atmospheric N deposition.

Keywords

riparian vegetation nitrogen retention denitrification resource allocation nitrogen use efficiency plasticity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

JD Schade was funded during this project by an EPA National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) Science to Achieve Results (STAR) fellowship. We are grateful to Stuart Fisher for his insight and generosity. We thank Cathy Kochert and Tom Collela for help with laboratory analyses. Nancy Grimm and Jill Welter helped with the development of these ideas. We owe a great debt of gratitude to Dr. Don DeAngelis for his patience and willingness to help with the modeling and presentation of equations. Three anonymous reviewers provided many insightful comments and suggestions that significantly improved the manuscript. We are grateful for their hard work.

References

  1. Aber JD, Melillo JM, Nadelhoffer KJ, McClaugherty CA, Pastor J. 1985. Fine root turnover in forest ecosystems in relation to quality and form of nitrogen availability: a comparison of two methods. Oecologia 66:317–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL. 2000. Relationships between fine root dynamics and nitrogen availability in Michigan northern hardwood forests. Oecologia 125:389–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chapin FS. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:233–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarholm M. 1985. Interactions of bacteria, protozoa, and plants leading to mineralization of soil nitrogen. Soil Biol and Biochem 17:181–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ettema CH, Lowrance R, Coleman DC. 1999. Riparian soil response to surface nitrogen input: temporal changes in denitrification, labile and microbial C and N pools, and bacterial and fungal respiration. Soil Biol Biochem 31:1609–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gold AJ, Jacinthe PA, Groffman PM, Wright WR, Puffer RH. 1998. Patchiness in groundwater nitrate removal in a riparian forest. J Environ Qual 27:146–55Google Scholar
  7. Grimm NB. 1987. Nitrogen dynamics during succession in a desert stream. Ecology 68:1157–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Groffman PM, Gold AJ, Simmons RC. 1992. Nitrate dynamics in riparian forests: microbial studies. J Environ Qual 21:666–71Google Scholar
  9. Hanson GC, Groffman PM, and Gold AJ. 1994. Denitrification in riparian wetlands receiving high and low groundwater nitrate inputs. J Environ Qual 23:917–22Google Scholar
  10. Haycock NE, Pinay G. 1993. Groundwater nitrate dynamics in grass and poplar vegetated riparian buffer strips during the winter. J Environ Qual 22:273–8Google Scholar
  11. Hendricks JJ, Nadelhoffer KJ, Aber JD. 1993. Assessing the role of fine roots in carbon and nutrient cycling. TREE 8:174–8.Google Scholar
  12. Hill AR. 1996. Nitrate removal in stream riparian zones. J Environ Qual 25:743–55Google Scholar
  13. Hill AR. 2000. Stream chemistry and riparian zones. In: Jones JB Jr, Mulholland PJ, Eds. Streams and ground waters. San Diego, CA, London: Academic, pp 83–110.Google Scholar
  14. Hill AR, Labadia CF, Sanmugadas K. 1998. Hyporheic zone hydrology and nitrogen dynamics in relation to the streambed topography of a N-rich stream. Biogeochemistry 42:285–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hobbie SE. 1992. Effects of plant species on nutrient cycling. TREE 7:336–9.Google Scholar
  16. Holmes RM, Fisher SG, Grimm NB. 1994. Parafluvial nitrogen dynamics in a desert stream ecosystem. JNABS 13:468–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacinthe PA, Groffman PM, Gold AJ, Mosier A. 1998. Patchiness in microbial nitrogen transformations in groundwater in a riparian forest. J Environ Quality 27:156–64Google Scholar
  18. Jones JB. 1995. Factors controlling hyporheic respiration in a desert stream. Freshw Biol 34:91–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. King JS, Albaugh TJ, Allen HL, Buford M, Strain BR, Dougherty P. 2002. Below-ground carbon input to soil is controlled by nutrient availability and fine root dynamics in loblolly pine. New Phytol 154:389–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lajtha K, Whitford WG. 1989. The effect of water and nitrogen amendments on photosynthesis, leaf demography, and resource-use efficience in Larrea tridentate, a desert evergreen shrub. Oecologia 80:341–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lowrance RR. 1998. Riparian forest ecosystems as filters for nonpoint-source pollution. In: Pace ML, Groffman PM, Eds. Successes, limitations and frontiers in ecosystem science. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer, p 113–41Google Scholar
  22. Lowrance RR, Todd R, Fail J, Hendrickson O, Leonard R, Asmussen L. 1984. Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultural watersheds. BioScience 34:374–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nadelhoffer KJ. 2000. The potential effects of nitrogen deposition on fine-root production in forest ecosystems. New Phytol 147:131–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nadelhoffer KJ, Aber JD, Melillo JM. 1985. Fine roots, net primary productivity, and soil nitrogen availability: a new hypothesis. Ecology 66:1377–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nadelhoffer KJ, Downs MR, Fry B. 1999. Sinks for 15N-enriched additions to an oak forest and a red pine plantation. Ecol Appl 9:72–86Google Scholar
  26. Neill O, GJ, Gordon AM. 1994. The nitrogen filtering capability of Carolina poplar in an artificial riparian zone. J Environ Qual 23:1218–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ostertag R. 2001. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus availability on fine-root dynamics in Hawaiian montane forests. Ecology 82:485–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peterjohn WJ, Correll DL. 1984. Nutrient dynamics in an agricultural watershed: observations on the role of the riparian forest. Ecology 65:1466–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL, Fogel R. 1993. The demography of fine roots in response to patches of water and nitrogen. New Phytol 125:575–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pregitzer KS, Zak DR, Curtis PS, Kubiske ME, Teeri JA, Vogel CS. 1995. Atmospheric CO2, soil nitrogen and turnover of fine roots. New Phytol 129:579–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reynolds HL, D’Antonio C. 1996. The ecological significance of plasticity in root weight ratio in response to nitrogen: opinion. Plant Soil 185:75–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schade JD, Fisher SG, Grimm NB, Seddon JA. 2001. The influence of a riparian shrub on nitrogen cycling in a Sonoran Desert stream. Ecology 82:3363–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith MS, Tiedje JM. 1979. The effects of roots on denitrification. Soil Sci Soc Am J 43:951–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Solorzano L. 1969. Determination of ammonium in natural waters by the phenolhypochlorite method. Limnol Oceanogr 14:799–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stromberg JC, Tiller R, Richter B. 1996. Effects of groundwater decline on riparian vegetation of semiarid regions: the San Pedro, Arizona. Ecol Appl 6:113–31.Google Scholar
  36. Van Veen JA, Merckx R, Van De Geijn SC. 1989. Plant- and soil-related controls of the flow of carbon from roots through the soil microbial biomass. Plant Soil 115:179–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vitousek PM 1982. Nutrient cycling and nutrient use efficiency. Am Nat 119:553–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vogt KA, Grier CC, Vogt DJ. 1986. Production, turnover and nutritional dynamics of above- and belowground detritus of world forests. Adv Ecol Res 15:303–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Whipps JM, Lynch JM. 1985. Energy losses by the plant in rhizodeposition. Annu Proc Phytochemi Soc of Eur 26:59–71Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Life SciencesArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Biology Department, Science CenterSt. Olat CollegeNorthfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations