, Volume 13, Issue 6, pp 874–887 | Cite as

Responses of Vegetation and Ecosystem CO2 Exchange to 9 Years of Nutrient Addition at Mer Bleue Bog



Anthropogenic nitrogen (N) loading has the potential to affect plant community structure and function, and the carbon dioxide (CO2) sink of peatlands. Our aim is to study how vegetation changes, induced by nutrient input, affect the CO2 exchange of a nutrient-limited bog. We conducted 9- and 4-year fertilization experiments at Mer Bleue bog, where we applied N addition levels of 1.6, 3.2, and 6.4 g N m−2 a−1, upon a background deposition of about 0.8 g N m−2 a−1, with or without phosphorus and potassium (PK). Only the treatments 3.2 and 6.4 g N m−2 a−1 with PK significantly affected CO2 fluxes. These treatments shifted the Sphagnum moss and dwarf shrub community to taller dwarf shrub thickets without moss, and the CO2 responses depended on the phase of vegetation transition. Overall, compared to the large observed changes in the vegetation, the changes in CO2 fluxes were small. Following Sphagnum loss after 5 years, maximum ecosystem photosynthesis (Pgmax) and net CO2 exchange (NEEmax) were lowered (−19 and −46%, respectively) in the highest NPK treatment. In the following years, while shrub height increased, the vascular foliar biomass did not fully compensate for the loss of moss biomass; yet, by year 8 there were no significant differences in Pgmax and NEEmax between the nutrient and the control treatments. At the same time, an increase (24–32%) in ecosystem respiration (ER) became evident. Trends in the N-only experiment resembled those in the older NPK experiment by the fourth year. The increasing ER with increasing vascular plant and decreasing Sphagnum moss biomass across the experimental plots suggest that high N deposition may lessen the CO2 sink of a bog.


atmospheric nitrogen deposition peatland carbon net ecosystem exchange Sphagnum Polytrichum strictum shrubs 


  1. Aerts R, Verhoeven JTA, Whigham DF. 1999. Plant-mediated controls on nutrient cycling in temperate fen and bogs. Ecology 80:2170–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aerts R, Wallén B, Malmer N, de Caluwe H. 2001. Nutritional constraints on Sphagnum-growth and potential decay in northern peatlands. J Ecol 89:292–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alm J, Sculman L, Walden J, Nykänen H, Martikainen PJ, Silvola J. 1999. Carbon balance of a boreal mire during a year with an exceptionally dry summer. Ecology 80:161–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arens SJT, Sullivan PF, Welker JM. 2008. Nonlinear responses to nitrogen and strong interactions with nitrogen and phosphorus additions drastically alter the structure and function of a high arctic ecosystem. J Geophys Res 11:G03S09. doi: 10.1029/2007JG000508.
  5. Bartsch I. 1994. Effects of fertilization on growth and nutrient use by Chamaedaphne calyculata in a raised bog. Can J Bot 72:323–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basiliko N, Moore T, Jeannotte R, Bubier JL. 2006. Nutrient input and carbon and microbial dynamics in an ombrotrophic bog. Geomicrobiol J 23:531–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baxter R, Emes MJ, Lee JA. 1992. Effects of experimentally applied increase in ammonium on growth and amino-acid metabolism of Sphagnum cuspidatum Ehrh. Ex. Hoffm. from differently polluted areas. New Phytol 120:265–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berendse F, Breemen N, Rydin H, Buttler A, Heijmans M, Hoosbeek MR, Lee JA, Mitchell E, Saarinen T, Vasander H, Wallen B. 2001. Raised atmospheric CO2 levels and increased N deposition cause shifts in plant species composition and production in Sphagnum bogs. Glob Change Biol 7:591–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bragazza L, Tahvanainen T, Kutnar L, Rydin H, Limpens J, Hájek M, Grosvenier P, Hájek T, Hajkova P, Hansen I, Iacumin P, Gerdol R. 2004. Nutritional constraints in ombrotrophic Sphagnum plants under increasing atmospheric nitrogen deposition in Europe. New Phytol 163:609–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bragazza L, Freeman C, Jones T, Rydin H, Limpens J, Fenner N, Ellis T, Gerdol R, Hájek M, Hájek T, Iacumin P, Kutnar L, Tahvanainen T, Toberman H. 2006. Atmospheric nitrogen deposition promotes carbon loss from peat bogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:19386–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bubier JL, Bhatia G, Moore T, Roulet TR, Lafleur PM. 2003. Spatial and temporal variability in growing season net ecosystem carbon dioxide exchange at a large peatland in Ontario, Canada. Ecosystems 6:353–67.Google Scholar
  12. Bubier JL, Moore TR, Crosby G. 2006. Fine-scale vegetation distribution in a cool temperate peatland. Can J Bot 84:910–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bubier JL, Moore TR, Bledzki LA. 2007. Effects of nutrient addition on vegetation and carbon cycling in an ombrotrophic bog. Glob Change Biol 13:1168–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Canadian Climate Normals 1971–2000. Canada’s National Climate Archive.
  15. Chapin CT, Bridgham SD, Pastor J. 2004. pH and nutrient effects on above-ground net primary production in a Minnesota, USA bog and fen. Wetlands 24:186–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clymo RS, Hayward PM. 1982. The ecology of Sphagnum. In: Smith AJE, Ed. Bryophyte ecology. London: Chapman and Hall. p 229–89.Google Scholar
  17. Douma JC, van Wijk MT, Lang SI, Shaver GR. 2007. The contribution of mosses to the carbon and water exchange of arctic ecosystems: quantification and relationships with system properties. Plant Cell Environ 30:1205–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gerdol R, Bragazza L, Brancaleoni L. 2008. Heatwave 2003: high summer temperature, rather than experimental fertilization, affects vegetation and CO2 exchange in an alpine bog. New Phytol 179:142–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gorham E. 1991. Northern peatlands: role in the carbon cycle and probable responses to climatic warming. Ecol Appl 1:182–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gruber N, Galloway JN. 2008. An Earth-system perspective of the global nitrogen cycle. Nature 451:93–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gunnarsson U, Boresjö Bronge LJ, Rydin H, Ohlson M. 2008. Near-zero recent carbon accumulation in a bog with high nitrogen deposition in SW Sweden. Glob Change Biol 14:2152–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heijmans MPD, Berendse F, Arp WJ, Masselink ABK, Klees H, de Visser W, van Breemen N. 2001. Effects of elevated carbon dioxide and increased nitrogen deposition on bog vegetation in the Netherlands. J Ecol 89:268–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hobbie S, Nadelhoffer KJ, Högberg P. 2002. A synthesis: the role of nutrients as constraints on carbon balances in boreal and arctic regions. Plant Soil 242:163–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnson LC, Shaver GR, Cades DH, Rastetter E, Nadelhoffer K, Giblin A, Laundre J, Stanley A. 2000. Plant carbon-nutrient interactions control CO2 exchange in Alaskan wet sedge tundra ecosystems. Ecology 81:453–69.Google Scholar
  25. Jonasson S, Castro J, Michelsen A. 2004. Litter, warming and plants affect respiration and allocation of soil microbial and plant C, N and P in arctic mesocosms. Soil Biol Biochem 26:1129–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lafleur PM, Roulet NT, Bubier JL, Frolking S, Moore TR. 2003. Interannual variability in the peatland-atmosphere carbon dioxide exchange at an ombrotrophic bog. Global Biogeochem Cycles 17:1036. doi:10.1029/2002GB001983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. LeBauer DS, Treseder KK. 2008. Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed. Ecology 89:371–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Limpens J, Berendse F. 2003. Growth reduction of Sphagnum magellanicum subjected to high nitrogen deposition: the role of amino acid nitrogen concentration. Oecologia 135:339–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Limpens J, Raymakers HTAG, Baar J, Berendse F, Zijlstra JD. 2003. The interaction between epiphytic algae, a parasitic fungus and Sphagnum as affected by N and P. Oikos 103:59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Limpens J, Berendse F, Klees H. 2004. How phosphorus availability affects the impact of nitrogen deposition on Sphagnum and vascular plants in bogs. Ecosystems 7:793–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Limpens J, Berendse F, Blodau C, Canadell JG, Freeman C, Holden J, Roulet N, Rydin H, Schaepman-Strub G. 2008. Peatland and the carbon cycle: from local processes to global implications—a synthesis. Biogeosciences 5:1475–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lund M, Christensen TR, Mastepanov M, Lindroth A, Ström L. 2009. Effects of N and P fertilization on the greenhouse gas exchange in two northern peatlands with contrasting N deposition rates. Biogeosciences 6:2135–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mack MC, Schuur EAG, Bret-Harte SM, Shaver GR, Chapin SFIII. 2004. Ecosystem carbon storage in arctic tundra reduced by long-term fertilization. Nature 431:440–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Malmer N, Albinsson C, Svensson BM, Wallén B. 2003. Interferences between Sphagnum and vascular plants: effects on plant community structure and peat formation. Oikos 100:469–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moore TR, Bubier JL, Frolking SE, Lafleur PM, Roulet NT. 2002. Plant biomass and production and CO2 exchange in an ombrotrophic bog. J Ecol 90:25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moore TR, Lafleur PM, Poon DMI, Heumann BW, Seaquist JW, Roulet NT. 2006. Spring photosynthesis in a cool temperate bog. Glob Change Biol 12:2323–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Moore TR, Bubier JL, Bledzki L. 2007. Litter decomposition in temperate peatland ecosystems: the effect of substrate and site. Ecosystems 10:949–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nadelhoffer KJ, Johnson L, Laundre J, Giblin AE, Shaver GR. 2002. Fine root production and nutrient content in wet moist arctic tundra as influences by chronic fertilization. Plant Soil 242:107–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Riutta T, Laine J, Tuittila E-S. 2007a. Sensitivity of CO2 exchange of a fen ecosystem components to water level variation. Ecosystems 10:718–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Riutta T, Laine J, Aurela M, Rinne J, Vesala T, Laurila T, Haapanala S, Pihlatie M, Tuittila ES. 2007b. Spatial variation in plant community functions regulates carbon gas dynamics in a boreal fen ecosystem. Tellus 59B:838–52.Google Scholar
  41. Roulet NT, Lafleur PM, Richard PJH, Moore TR, Humphreys ER, Bubier J. 2007. Contemporary carbon accumulation and late Holocene carbon accumulation in a northern peatland. Glob Change Biol 12:1–15.Google Scholar
  42. Rydin H, Jeglum J. 2006. The biology of peatlands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Saarnio S, Järviö S, Saarinen T, Vasander H, Silvola J. 2003. Minor changes in vegetation and carbon gas balance in a boreal mire under a raised CO2 or NH4NO3 supply. Ecosystems 6:46–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shaver GR, Giblin AE, Nadelhoffer KJ, Thieler KK, Downs MR, Laundre JA, Rastetter EB. 2006. Carbon turnover in Alaskan tundra soils: effects of organic matter quality, temperature, moisture and fertilizer. J Ecol 94:740–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shaver GR, Chapin FSIII. 1980. Response to fertilization by various plant growth forms in an Alaskan tundra: nutrient accumulation and growth. Ecology 61:662–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Silvola J, Aaltonen H. 1984. Water content and photosynthesis in the peat mosses Sphagnum fuscum and S. angustifolium. Ann Bot Fenn 21:1–6.Google Scholar
  47. Street LE, Shaver GR, Williams M, van Wijk MT. 2007. What is the relationship between changes in canopy leaf area and changes in photosynthetic CO2 flux in arctic ecosystems? J Ecol 95:139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tomassen HBM, Smolders AJP, Limpens J, Lamers LPM, Roefols JGM. 2004. Expansion of invasive species on ombrotrophic bogs: desiccation or high N deposition. J Appl Ecol 41:139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Turetsky MR. 2003. The role of bryophytes in carbon and nitrogen cycling. Bryologist 106:395–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Turunen J, Roulet NT, Moore TR. 2004. Nitrogen deposition and increased carbon accumulation in ombrotrophic peatlands in eastern Canada. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 18:GB2003. doi: 10.1029/2003GB002154.
  51. Van Wijk MT, Clemmensen KE, Shaver GR, Williams M, Callaghan TV, Chapin FSIII, Cornelissen JHC, Gought L, Hobbie SE, Jonasson S, Lee JA, Michelsen A, Press MC, Richardson SJ, Rueth H. 2003. Long-term ecosystem level experiments at Toolik lake, Alaska, and at Abisko, northern Sweden: generalizations and differences in ecosystem and plant type responses to global change. Glob Change Biol 10:105–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vitt DH, Wieder K, Halsey LA, Turetsky M. 2003. Response of Sphagnum fuscum to nitrogen deposition: a case study of ombrogenous peatlands in Alberta, Canada. Bryologist 106:235–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waldrop WP, Firestone MK. 2004. Altered utilization patterns of young and old soil C by microorganisms caused by temperature and shifts and N additions. Biogeochemistry 67:235–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiedermann MM, Nordin A, Gunnarsson U, Nilsson MB, Ericson L. 2007. Global change shifts vegetation and plant-parasite interactions in a boreal mire. Ecology 88:454–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Wiedermann MM, Gunnarsson U, Nilsson MB, Nordin A, Ericson L. 2009. Can small-scale experiments predict ecosystem responses? An example from peatlands. Oikos 118:449–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sari Juutinen
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jill L. Bubier
    • 1
  • Tim R. Moore
    • 2
  1. 1.Environmental Studies ProgramMount Holyoke CollegeSouth HadleyUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeographyMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of Forest SciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations