Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 14, Issue 7, pp 1178–1195 | Cite as

Patterns of Root Dynamics in Mangrove Forests Along Environmental Gradients in the Florida Coastal Everglades, USA

  • Edward Castañeda-Moya
  • Robert R. Twilley
  • Victor H. Rivera-Monroy
  • Brian D. Marx
  • Carlos Coronado-Molina
  • Sharon M. L. Ewe
Article

Abstract

Patterns of mangrove vegetation in two distinct basins of Florida Coastal Everglades (FCE), Shark River estuary and Taylor River Slough, represent unique opportunities to test hypotheses that root dynamics respond to gradients of resources, regulators, and hydroperiod. We propose that soil total phosphorus (P) gradients in these two coastal basins of FCE cause specific patterns in belowground biomass allocation and net primary productivity that facilitate nutrient acquisition, but also minimize stress from regulators and hydroperiod in flooded soil conditions. Shark River basin has higher P and tidal hydrology with riverine mangroves, in contrast to scrub mangroves of Taylor basin with more permanent flooding and lower P across the coastal landscape. Belowground biomass (0–90 cm) of mangrove sites in Shark River and Taylor River basins ranged from 2317 to 4673 g m−2, with the highest contribution (62–85%) of roots in the shallow root zone (0–45 cm) compared to the deeper root zone (45–90 cm). Total root productivity did not vary significantly among sites and ranged from 407 to 643 g m−2 y−1. Root production in the shallow root zone accounted for 57–78% of total production. Root turnover rates ranged from 0.04 to 0.60 y−1 and consistently decreased as the root size class distribution increased from fine to coarse roots, indicating differences in root longevity. Fine root biomass was negatively correlated with soil P density and frequency of inundation, whereas fine root turnover decreased with increasing soil N:P ratios. Lower P availability in Taylor River basin relative to Shark River basin, along with higher regulator and hydroperiod stress, confirms our hypothesis that interactions of stress from resource limitation and long duration of hydroperiod account for higher fine root biomass along with lower fine root production and turnover. Because fine root production and organic matter accumulation are the primary processes controlling soil formation and accretion in scrub mangrove forests, root dynamics in the P-limited carbonate ecosystem of south Florida have a major controlling role as to how mangroves respond to future impacts of sea-level rise.

Keywords

root biomass root productivity root turnover rates belowground allocation P availability mangroves Florida Coastal Everglades 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was conducted as part of the Florida Coastal Everglades Long-Term Ecological Research (FCE-LTER) program funded by the National Science Foundation (Grants #DBI-0620409 and #DEB-9910514). We would like to thank Matthew Heels, Leander J. Lavergne, Kim de Mutsert, and Leigh Anne Sharp for laboratory assistance. Special thanks to the Florida Bay Interagency Science Center-Everglades National Park for logistic support during the study. The authors thank three anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

References

  1. Aber JD, Melillo JM, Nadelhoffer KJ, McClaugherty CA, Pastor J. 1985. Fine root turnover in forest ecosystems in relation to quantity and form of nitrogen availability: a comparison of two methods. Oecologia 66:317–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alongi DM, Tirendi F, Clough BF. 2000. Below-ground decomposition of organic matter in forests of the mangroves Rhizophora stylosa and Avicennia marina along the arid coast of Western Australia. Aquat Bot 68:97–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspila KI, Agemian H, Chau SY. 1976. A semi-automated method for the determination of inorganic, organic and total phosphate in sediments. Analyst 101:187–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball MC. 1996. Comparative ecophysiology of mangrove forests and tropical lowland moist rainforest. In: Mulkey SS, Chazdon RL, Smith AP, Eds. Tropical forest plant ecophysiology. New York: Chapman and Hall. p 461–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bazzaz FA. 1997. Allocation of resources in plants: state of the science and critical questions. In: Bazzaz FA, Grace J, Eds. Plant resource allocation. San Diego (CA): Academic Press. p 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bouillon S, Borges AV, Castañeda-Moya E, Diele K, Dittmar T, Duke NC, Kristensen E, Lee SY, Marchand C, Middleburg JJ, Rivera-Monroy V, Smith TJI, Twilley RR. 2008. Mangrove production and carbon sinks: a revision of global budget estimates. Global Biogeochem Cycles 22:GB2013. doi: 10.1029/2007GB003052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Briggs SV. 1977. Estimates of biomass in a temperate mangrove community. Aust J Ecol 2:369–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL. 2000. Relationships between fine root dynamics and nitrogen availability in Michigan northern hardwood forests. Oecologia 125:389–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cahoon DR, Hensel P, Rybczyk J, McKee KL, Proffitt E, Perez BC. 2003. Mass tree mortality leads to mangrove peat collapse at Bay Islands, Honduras after Hurricane Mitch. J Ecol 91:1093–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardona-Olarte P, Twilley RR, Krauss KW, Rivera-Monroy VH. 2006. Responses of neotropical mangrove seedlings grown in monoculture and mixed culture under treatments of hydroperiod and salinity. Hydrobiologia 569:325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castañeda E. 2010. Landscape patterns of community structure, biomass and net primary productivity of mangrove forests in the Florida Coastal Everglades as a function of resources, regulators, hydroperiod, and hurricane disturbance. Ph.D. Dissertation. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.Google Scholar
  12. Castañeda-Moya E, Rivera-Monroy VH, Twilley RR. 2006. Mangrove zonation in the dry life zone of the Gulf of Fonseca, Honduras. Estuaries Coasts 29:751–64.Google Scholar
  13. Castañeda-Moya E, Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy VH, Zhang K, Davis SEIII, Ross M. 2010. Sediment and nutrient deposition associated with Hurricane Wilma in mangroves of the Florida Coastal Everglades. Estuaries Coasts 33:45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chapin FSI. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:233–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chapin FSI, Bloom AJ, Field CB, Waring RH. 1987. Plant responses to multiple environmental factors. Bioscience 37:49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen R, Twilley RR. 1998. A gap dynamic model of mangrove forest development along gradients of soil salinity and nutrient resources. J Ecol 86:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen R, Twilley RR. 1999a. A simulation model of organic matter and nutrient accumulation in mangrove wetland soils. Biogeochemistry 44:93–118.Google Scholar
  18. Chen R, Twilley RR. 1999b. Patterns of mangrove forest structure and soil nutrient dynamics along the Shark River Estuary, Florida. Estuaries 22:955–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Childers DL. 2006. A synthesis of long-term research by the Florida Coastal Everglades LTER Program. Hydrobiologia 569:531–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chmura GL, Anisfeld SC, Cahoon DR, Lynch JC. 2003. Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Global Biogeochem Cycles 17:1111. doi: 10.029/2002GB001917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Clark DA, Brown S, Kicklighter DW, Chambers JQ, Thomlinson JR, Ni J. 2001. Measuring net primary production in forests: concepts and field methods. Ecol Appl 11:356–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cormier N. 2003. Belowground productivity in mangrove forests of Pohnpei and Kosrae, Federal States of Micronesia. M.S. Thesis. Biology Department, Lafayette, LA, 99 p.Google Scholar
  23. Darby FA, Turner RE. 2008a. Below- and aboveground biomass of Spartina alterniflora: response to nutrient addition in a Louisiana salt marsh. Estuaries Coasts 31:326–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Darby FA, Turner RE. 2008b. Below- and aboveground Spartina alterniflora production in a Louisiana salt marsh. Estuaries Coasts 31:223–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davis SEI, Cable JE, Childers DL, Coronado-Molina C, Day JWJ, Huttle CD, Madden CJ, Reyes E, Rudnick D, Sklar F. 2004. Importance of storm events in controlling ecosystem structure and function in a Florida Gulf coast estuary. J Coastal Res 20:1198–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Eissenstat DM, Wells CE, Yanai RD, Whitbeck JL. 2000. Building roots in a changing environment: implications for root longevity. New Phytol 147:33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eissenstat DM, Yanai RD. 1997. The ecology of root lifespan. Adv Ecol Res 27:1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ewe SML, Sternberg LdaSL, Childers DL. 2007. Seasonal plant water uptake patterns in the saline southeast Everglades ecotone. Oecologia 152:607–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ewe SML, Gaiser EE, Childers DL, Iwaniec D, Rivera-Monroy V, Twilley RR. 2006. Spatial and temporal patterns of aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) along two freshwater-estuarine transects in the Florida Coastal Everglades. Hydrobiologia 569:459–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Feller IC, Lovelock CE, McKee KL. 2007. Nutrient addition differentially affects ecological processes of Avicennia germinans in nitrogen versus phosphorus limited mangrove ecosystems. Ecosystems 10:347–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Feller IC, McKee KL, Whigham DF, O’Neill JP. 2003a. Nitrogen vs. phosphorus limitation across an ecotonal gradient in a mangrove forest. Biogeochemistry 62:145–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Feller IC, Whigham DF, McKee KL, Lovelock CE. 2003b. Nitrogen limitation of growth and nutrient dynamics in a disturbed mangrove forest, Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Oecologia 134:405–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Fiala K, Hernandez L. 1993. Root biomass of a mangrove forest in southwestern Cuba (Majana). Ekologia (Bratislava) 12:15–30.Google Scholar
  34. Fourqurean JW, Zieman JC, Powell GVN. 1992. Phosphorus limitation of primary production in Florida Bay: evidence from C:N:P ratios of the dominant seagrass Thalassia testudinum. Limnol Oceanogr 37:162–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gill RA, Jackson RB. 2000. Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytol 147:13–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Giraldo B. 2005. Belowground productivity of mangrove forests in southwest Florida. Ph.D. Dissertation. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.Google Scholar
  37. Gleason SM, Ewel KC. 2002. Organic matter dynamics on the forest floor of a Micronesian mangrove forest: an investigation of species composition shifts. Biotropica 34:190–8.Google Scholar
  38. Gleeson SK, Tilman D. 1992. Plant allocation and the multiple limitation hypothesis. Am Nat 139:1322–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Golley F, Odum HT, Wilson RF. 1962. The structure and metabolism of a Puerto Rican red mangrove forest in May. Ecology 43:9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Golley FB, McGinnis JT, Clements RG, Child GI, Duever MJ. 1975. Mineral cycling in a tropical moist forest ecosystem. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  41. Herbert DA, Fourqurean JW. 2009. Phosphorus availability and salinity control productivity and demography of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum in Florida Bay. Estuaries Coasts 32:188–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jackson RB, Mooney HA, Schulze ED. 1997. A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proc Natl Acad Sciences USA 94:7362–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kairo JG, Lang’at JKS, Dahdouh-Guebas F, Bosire J, Karachi M. 2008. Structural development and productivity of replanted mangrove plantations in Kenya. For Ecol Manag 255:2670–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kenward M, Roger J. 1997. Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics 53:983–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Khan MNI, Suwa R, Hagihara A. 2007. Carbon and nitrogen pools in a mangrove stand of Kandelia obovata (S., L.) Yong: vertical distribution in the soil-vegetation system. Wetlands Ecol Manage 15:141–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Koch MS. 1997. Rhizophora mangle L. seedling development into the sapling stage across resource and stress gradients in subtropical Florida. Biotropica 29:427–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Koch MS. 1996. Resource availability and abiotic effects on Rhizophora mangle L. (Red Mangrove) development in South Florida. Ph.D. Dissertation, Biology, Coral Gables, Miami.Google Scholar
  48. Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM. 1996. The vegetation N:P ratio: a new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. J Appl Ecol 33:1441–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Komiyama A, Havanond S, Srisawatt W, Mochida Y, Fujimoto K, Ohnishi T, Ishihara S, Miyagi T. 2000. Top/root biomass ratio of a secondary mangrove (Ceriops tagal (Perr.) C.B. Rob.) forest. For Ecol Manag 139:127–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Komiyama A, Moriya H, Suhardjono H, Toma T, Ogino K. 1988. Forest as an ecosystem, its structure and function. In: Ogino K, Chihara M, Eds. Biological systems of mangroves. Ehime: Ehime University. p 85–151.Google Scholar
  51. Komiyama A, Ogino K, Aksornkoae S, Sabhasri S. 1987. Root biomass of a mangrove forest in southern Thailand. 1. Estimation by the trench method and the zonal structure of root biomass. J Trop Ecol 3:97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Krauss KW, Lovelock CE, McKee KL, Lopez-Hoffman L, Ewe SML, Sousa WP. 2008. Environmental drivers in mangrove establishment and early development: a review. Aquat Bot 89:105–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Krauss KW, Doyle TW, Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy V, Sullivan JK. 2006. Evaluating the relative contributions of hydroperiod and soil fertility on growth of south Florida mangroves. Hydrobiologia 569:311–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lodge TE. 2005. The Everglades handbook: understanding the ecosystem. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press.Google Scholar
  55. Lovelock CE. 2008. Soil respiration and belowground carbon allocation in mangrove forests. Ecosystems 11:342–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lovelock CE, Feller IC, McKee KL, Engelbrecht BM, Ball MC. 2004. The effect of nutrient enrichment on growth, photosynthesis and hydraulic conductance of dwarf mangroves in Panama. Funct Ecol 18:25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lugo AE. 1990. Fringe wetlands. In: Lugo AE, Brinson M, Brown S, Eds. Ecosystems of the World 15, Forested Wetlands. Amsterdam: Elsevier. p 143–69.Google Scholar
  58. Lugo AE, Snedaker SC. 1974. The ecology of mangroves. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 5:39–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mackey AP. 1993. Biomass of the mangrove Avicennia marina (Forsk.) Vierh. near Brisbane, south-eastern Queensland. Aust J Mar Freshw Res 44:721–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mancera Pineda JE, Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy VH. 2009. Carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) isotopic discrimination in mangroves in Florida Coastal Everglades as a function of environmental stress. Contrib Mar Sci 38:109–29.Google Scholar
  61. McKee KL. 2001. Root proliferation in decaying roots and old root channels: a nutrient conservation mechanism in oligotrophic mangrove forests? J Ecol 89:876–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McKee KL, Cahoon DR, Feller IC. 2007. Caribbean mangroves adjust to rising sea level through biotic controls on change in soil elevation. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:545–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McKee KL, Faulkner P. 2000. Restoration of biogeochemical function in mangrove forests. Restor Ecol 8:247–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Middleton BA, McKee KL. 2001. Degradation of mangrove tissues and implications for peat formation in Belizean island forests. J Ecol 89:818–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nadelhoffer KJ. 2000. The potential effects of nitrogen deposition on fine-root production in forest ecosystems. New Phytol 147:131–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Nadelhoffer KJ, Aber JD, Melillo JM. 1985. Fine roots, net primary production, and soil nitrogen availability: a new hypothesis. Ecology 66:1377–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Nadelhoffer KJ, Raich JW. 1992. Fine root production estimates and belowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems. Ecology 73:1139–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Naidoo G. 2009. Differential effects of nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment on growth of dwarf Avicennia marina mangroves. Aquat Bot 90:184–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Norby RJ, Jackson RB. 2000. Root dynamics and global change: seeking an ecosystem perspective. New Phytol 147:3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ostertag R. 2001. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus availability on fine-root dynamics in Hawaiian montane forests. Ecology 82:485–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Poret N, Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy VH, Coronado-Molina C. 2007. Belowground decomposition of mangrove roots in Florida Coastal Everglades. Estuaries Coasts 30:1–6.Google Scholar
  72. Raich JW, Nadelhoffer KJ. 1989. Belowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems: global trends. Ecology 70:1346–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rivera-Monroy V, Twilley RR, Davis SEIII, Childers DL, Simard M, Chambers JQ, Jaffe R, Boyer JN, Rudnick DT, Zhang K, Castañeda-Moya E, Ewe SML, Price RM, Coronado-Molina C, Ross M, Smith TJI, Michot B, Meselhe E, Nuttle W, Troxler TG, Noe G. 2011. The role of the Everglades Mangrove Ecotone Region (EMER) in regulating nutrient cycling and wetland productivity in south Florida. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 41:633–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Robertson AI, Dixon P. 1993. Separating live and dead fine roots using colloidal silica: an example from mangrove forests. Plant Soil 157:151–4.Google Scholar
  75. Ross MS, Meeder JF, Sah JP, Ruiz PL, Telesnicki GJ. 2000. The southeast saline Everglades revisited: 50 years of coastal vegetation change. J Veg Sci 11:101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ruess RW, Hendrick RL, Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Sveinbjornsson B, Allen MF, Maurer GE. 2003. Coupling fine root dynamics with ecosystem carbon cycling in black spruce forests of interior Alaska. Ecol Monogr 73:643–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Saintilan N. 1997a. Above- and below-ground biomasses of two species of mangrove on the Hawkesbury River estuary, New South Wales. Mar Freshw Res 48:147–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Saintilan N. 1997b. Above- and below-ground biomass of mangroves in a sub-tropical estuary. Mar Freshw Res 48:601–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Santantonio D, Hermann RK, Overton WS. 1977. Root biomass studies in forest ecosystems. Pedobiologia 17:1–31.Google Scholar
  80. Schlichting CD. 1986. The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17:667–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sherman RE, Fahey TJ, Martinez P. 2003. Spatial patterns of biomass and aboveground net primary productivity in a mangrove ecosystem in the Dominican Republic. Ecosystems 6:384–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Simard M, Zhang K, Rivera-Monroy V, Ross MS, Ruiz PL, Castañeda-Moya E, Twilley RR, Rodriguez E. 2006. Mapping height and biomass of mangrove forests in Everglades National Park with SRTM elevation data. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 72:299–311.Google Scholar
  83. Sutula M. 1999. Processes controlling nutrient transport in the southeastern Everglades wetlands. Ph.D. Dissertation. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.Google Scholar
  84. Tamooh F, Huxham M, Karachi M, Mencuccini M, Kairo JG, Kirui B. 2008. Below-ground root yield and distribution in natural and replanted mangrove forests at Gazi bay, Kenya. For Ecol Manag 256:1290–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Tilman D. 1985. The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession. Am Nat 125:827–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Turner RE, Swenson EM, Milan CS, Lee JM, Oswald TA. 2004. Below-ground biomass in healthy and impaired salt marshes. Ecol Res 19:29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Twilley RR, Lugo AE, Patterson-Zucca C. 1986. Litter production and turnover in basin mangrove forests in southwest Florida. Ecology 67:670–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy V. 2005. Developing performance measures of mangrove wetlands using simulation models of hydrology, nutrient biogeochemistry, and community dynamics. J Coastal Res 40:79–93.Google Scholar
  89. Twilley RR, Rivera-Monroy V. 2009. Ecogeomorphic models of nutrient biogeochemistry for mangrove wetlands. In: Perillo GME, Wolanski E, Cahoon DR, Brinson MM, Eds. Coastal wetlands: an integrated ecosystem approach. Amsterdam: Elsevier. p 641–83.Google Scholar
  90. Verhoeven JTA, Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM. 1996. Nitrogen- or phosphorus-limited growth in herbaceous, wet vegetation: relations with atmospheric inputs and management regimes. TREE 11:494–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Vogt KA, Vogt DJ, Bloomfield J. 1998. Analysis of some direct and indirect methods for estimating root biomass and production of forests at an ecosystem level. Plant Soil 200:71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward Castañeda-Moya
    • 1
  • Robert R. Twilley
    • 1
  • Victor H. Rivera-Monroy
    • 1
  • Brian D. Marx
    • 2
  • Carlos Coronado-Molina
    • 3
  • Sharon M. L. Ewe
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, School of the Coast and EnvironmentLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Experimental StatisticsLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA
  3. 3.Wetland Watershed Sciences DepartmentSouth Florida Water Management DistrictWest Palm BeachUSA
  4. 4.Ecology and Environment, Inc.West Palm BeachUSA

Personalised recommendations