Plants Mediate the Sensitivity of Soil Respiration to Rainfall Variability
- 489 Downloads
Soil respiration from grasslands plays a critical role in determining carbon dioxide (CO2) feedbacks between soils and the atmosphere. In these often mesic systems, soil moisture and temperature tend to co-regulate soil respiration. Increasing variance of rainfall patterns may alter aboveground–belowground interactions and have important implications for the sensitivity of soil respiration to fluctuations in moisture and temperature. We conducted a set of field experiments to evaluate the independent and interactive effects of rainfall variability and plant–soil processes on respiration dynamics. Plant removal had strong effects on grassland soils, which included altered CO2 flux owing to absence of root respiration; increased soil moisture and temperature; and reduced availability of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) for heterotrophic respiration by microorganisms. These plant-mediated effects interacted with our rainfall variability treatments to determine the sensitivity of soil respiration to both moisture and temperature. Using time-series multiple regression, we found that plants dampened the sensitivity of respiration to moisture under high variability rainfall treatments, which may reflect the relative stability of root contributions to total soil respiration. In contrast, plants increased the sensitivity of respiration to temperature under low variability rainfall treatment suggesting that the environmental controls on soil CO2 dynamics in mesic habitats may be context dependent. Our results provide insight into the aboveground–belowground mechanisms controlling respiration in grasslands under variable rainfall regimes, which may be important for predicting CO2 dynamics under current and future climate scenarios.
Key wordsCO2 heterotrophic respiration pulse root respiration time-series sensors microbial climate change precipitation
We thank the KBS LTER field technicians for helping to maintain experimental plots, C. McMinn and B. Phillips for assistance with soil sampling, B. Lehmkuhl for logistical support, and S.E. Jones and A.S. Hartshorn for critical comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We acknowledge support from the Rackham Research Endowment and the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station (MAES). In addition, this project was supported by National Research Initiative Grants (2006-35107-16725 and 2008-35107-04481) from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Kellogg Biological Station contribution # 1527.
- Diggle PJ. 1990. Time series: a biostatistical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Frey SD. 2007. Spatial distribution of soil organisms. In: Ecology Biochemistry, Paul EA, Eds. Soil microbiology. London: Academic Press. Google Scholar
- IPCC. 2007. Climate change 2007: the scientific basis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
- Livingston GP, Hutchinson GL. 1995. Enclosure-based measurement of trace gas exchange: applications and sources of error. In: Matson PA, Harriss RC, Eds. Biogenic trace gases: measuring emissions from soil, water. Osney Mead, Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science. p 14–51.Google Scholar
- Noormets A, Desai AR, Cook BD, Euskirchen ES, Ricciuto DM, Davis KJ, Bolstad PV, Schmid HP, Vogel CV, Carey EV, Su HB, Chen J. 2008. Moisture sensitivity of ecosystem respiration: comparison of 14 forest ecosystems in the Upper Great Lakes Region, USA. Agric For Meteorol 148:216–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pole A, West M, Harrison J. 1994. Applied Bayesian forecasting and time series analysis. New York: Chapman-Hall.Google Scholar
- Schlesinger WH. 1997. Biogeochemistry, an analysis of global change. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- van der Putten WH, Bardgett RD, de Ruiter PC, Hol WHG, Meyer KM, Bezemer TM, Bradford MA, Christensen S, Eppinga MB, Fukami T, Hemerik L, Molofsky J, Schadler M, Scherber C, Strauss SY, Vos M, Wardle DA. 2009. Empirical and theoretical challenges in aboveground-belowground ecology. Oecologia 161:1–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Weltzin JF, Loik ME, Schwinning S, Williams DG, Fay PA, Haddad BM, Harte J, Huxman TE, Knapp AK, Lin GH, Pockman WT, Shaw MR, Small EE, Smith MD, Smith SD, Tissue DT, Zak JC. 2003. Assessing the response of terrestrial ecosystems to potential changes in precipitation. Bioscience 53:941–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wolfinger R, Chang M. 1999. Comparing the SAS GLM and MIXED Procedures for repeated measures. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.Google Scholar