Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 16, Issue 6, pp 1039–1051 | Cite as

Contrasting Effects of Precipitation Manipulations on Production in Two Sites within the Central Grassland Region, USA

  • Kerry M. Byrne
  • William K. Lauenroth
  • Peter B. Adler
Article

Abstract

In grassland ecosystems, where soil water most frequently controls ecosystem processes, expected changes in precipitation and temperature may have dramatic effects on ecosystem dynamics. Previous observational studies have reported that aboveground net primary production (ANPP) in grasslands is very sensitive to changes in precipitation. Yet, we lack experimentally based evidence to support these observations. Further, most of the studies have focused solely on ANPP, neglecting belowground production (BNPP). This is an important gap in our knowledge, as BNPP represents 50% or more of total net primary production (NPP) in grasslands. Here, we present results from a 3-year water manipulation experiment (2008–2010) at two sites in the central grassland region of North America, USA. We were successful in changing the soil water content in our treatments, but these changes resulted in different, but significant responses in ANPP and BNPP at our two sites. At the shortgrass steppe, we found that neither NPP nor ANPP were sensitive to treatment precipitation, and although we found BNPP was sensitive to changes in treatment precipitation, the direction of the response varied between years. In contrast, ANPP was very sensitive to treatment precipitation on the mixed-grass prairie, whereas BNPP was insensitive. Based on our finding that two grassland ecosystems showed dramatically different above and belowground production responses to soil water manipulations, we cannot assume that predicted changes in climate will cause similar above- and belowground production responses. Second, our results demonstrated that sites within the same region may differ markedly in the sensitivity of ANPP to changes in growing season precipitation.

Keywords

ANPP BNPP climate change ecosystem sensitivity soil water 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was conducted in part at the Central Plains Experimental Range (CPER), which is administered by the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and was a Long Term Ecological Research site (SGS-LTER), funded by the National Science Foundation (Grant No. 1027319). This research was supported in part by the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station (to PBA), Utah State University, and approved as journal paper number 8356. The Nature Conservancy provided partial support for this work through the Nebraska Chapter’s J.E. Weaver Competitive Grants Program (to KMB). We thank J. A. Klein, A. K. Knapp, and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions on the manuscript. The authors thank J.A. Leiker, M. Lindquist, and the Shortgrass Steppe Field Crew for their assistance designing and constructing the rainout shelters, conducting fieldwork, and applying water to the water addition treatment.

Supplementary material

10021_2013_9666_MOESM1_ESM.doc (29 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 29 kb)

References

  1. Baer SG, Blair JM, Collins SL, Knapp AK. 2003. Soil resources regulate productivity and diversity in newly established tallgrass prairie. Ecology 84:724–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bai W, Wan S, Niu S et al. 2010. Increased temperature and precipitation interact to affect root production, mortality, and turnover in a temperate steppe: implications for ecosystem C cycling. Glob Chang Biol 16:1306–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Briggs JM, Knapp AK. 1995. Interannual variability in primary production in tallgrass prairie: climate, soil moisture, topographic position, and fire as determinants of aboveground biomass. Am J Botany 82:1024–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Byrne KM, Lauenroth WK, Adler PB, Byrne CM. 2011. Estimating aboveground net primary production in grasslands: a comparison of nondestructive methods. Rangel Ecol Manage 64:498–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CCSP. 2008. The effects of climate change on agriculture, land resources, water resources, and biodiversity. A report by the US Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency. Google Scholar
  6. Christensen JH, Hewitson B, Busuioc A et al. 2007. Regional climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M et al., Eds. Climate Change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, UK/New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cipriotti PA, Flombaum P, Sala OE, Aguiar MR. 2008. Does drought control emergence and survival of grass seedlings in semi-arid rangelands? An example with a Patagonian species. J Arid Environ 72:162–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans SE, Byrne KM, Lauenroth WK, Burke IC. 2011. Defining the limit to resistance in a drought-tolerant grassland: long-term severe drought significantly reduces the dominant species and increases ruderals. J Ecol 99:1500–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fay PA, Carlisle JD, Knapp AK, Blair JM, Collins SL. 2003. Productivity responses to altered rainfall patterns in a C4-dominated grassland. Oecologia 137:245–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fiala K, Tůma I, Holub P. 2009. Effect of manipulated rainfall on root production and plant belowground dry mass of different grassland ecosystems. Ecosystems 12:906–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frank DA, McNaughton SJ. 1990. Aboveground biomass estimation with the canopy intercept method: a plant growth form caveat. Oikos 57:57–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frank DA, Pontes AW, Maine EM, Caruana J, Raina R, Raina S, Fridley JD. 2010. Grassland root communities: species distributions and how they are linked to aboveground abundance. Ecology 91:3201–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gao Y, Chen Q, Lin S, Giese M, Brueck H. 2011. Resource manipulation effects on net primary production, biomass allocation and rain-use efficiency of two semiarid grassland sites in Inner Mongolia, China. Oecologia 165:855–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grime JP, Brown VK, Thompson K et al. 2000. The response of two contrasting limestone grasslands to simulated climate change. Science 289:762–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heisler-White J, Knapp A, Kelly E. 2008. Increasing precipitation event size increases aboveground net primary productivity in a semi-arid grassland. Oecologia 158:129–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heisler-White JL, Blair JM, Kelly EF, Harmoney K, Knapp AK. 2009. Contingent productivity responses to more extreme rainfall regimes across a grassland biome. Glob Chang Biol 15:2894–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heitschmidt RK, Vermeire LT. 2006. Can abundant summer precipitation counter losses in herbage production caused by spring drought? Rangel Ecol Manage 59:392–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heitschmidt RK, Haferkamp MR, Karl MG, Hild AL. 1999. Drought and grazing: I. Effects on quantity of forage produced. J Range Manage 52:440–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hyder DN. 1975. Ecological responses of native plants and guidelines for management of shortgrass range. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 1503.Google Scholar
  20. Jackson RB, Canadell J, Ehleringer JR, Mooney HA, Sala OE, Schulze ED. 1996. A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia 108:389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jentsch A, Kreyling J, Elmer M et al. 2011. Climate extremes initiate ecosystem-regulating functions while maintaining productivity. J Ecol 99:689–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knapp AK, Seastedt TR. 1986. Detritus accumulation limits productivity of tallgrass prairie. Bioscience 36:662–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knapp AK, Smith MD. 2001. Variation among biomes in temporal dynamics of aboveground primary production. Science 291:481–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Knapp AK, Fahnestock JT, Hamburg SP, Statland LB, Seastedt TR, Schimel DS. 1993. Landscape patterns in soil–plant water relations and primary production in tallgrass prairie. Ecology 74:549–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lauenroth W, Bradford J. 2006. Ecohydrology and the partitioning AET between transpiration and evaporation in a semiarid steppe. Ecosystems 9:756–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lauenroth WK, Burke IC. 1995. Great plains, climate variability. In: Nierenberg WA, Ed. Encyclopedia of environmental biology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. p 237–49.Google Scholar
  27. Lauenroth WK, Sala OE. 1992. Long-term forage production of North American shortgrass steppe. Ecol Appl 2:397–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lauenroth WK, Dodd JL, Sims PL. 1978. The effects of water- and nitrogen-induced stresses on plant community structure in a semiarid grassland. Oecologia 36:211–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lauenroth WK, Hunt HW, Swift DM, Singh JS. 1986. Estimating aboveground net primary production in grasslands: a simulation approach. Ecol Model 33:297–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lauenroth WK, Burke IC, Gutmann MP. 1999. The structure and function of ecosystems in the central North American grassland region. Gt Plains Res 9:223–59.Google Scholar
  31. Lauenroth W, Wade A, Williamson M, Ross B, Kumar S, Cariveau D. 2006. Uncertainty in calculations of net primary production for grasslands. Ecosystems 9:843–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. LeCain D, Morgan J, Milchunas D, Mosier A, Nelson J, Smith D. 2006. Root biomass of individual species, and root size characteristics after five years of CO2 enrichment on native shortgrass steppe. Plant Soil 279:219–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McCulley RL, Burke IC, Nelson JA, Lauenroth WK, Knapp AK, Kelly EF. 2005. Regional patterns in carbon cycling across the great plains of North America. Ecosystems 8:106–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Milchunas D. 2009. Estimating root production: comparison of 11 methods in shortgrass steppe and review of biases. Ecosystems 12:1381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Milchunas DG, Lauenroth WK. 2001. Belowground primary production by carbon isotope decay and long-term root biomass dynamics. Ecosystems 4:139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Milchunas DG, Forwood JR, Lauenroth WK. 1994. Productivity of long-term grazing treatments in response to seasonal precipitation. J Range Manage 47:133–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Milchunas DG, Morgan JA, Mosier AR, Lecain DR. 2005a. Root dynamics and demography in shortgrass steppe under elevated CO2, and comments on minirhizotron methodology. Glob Chang Biol 11:1837–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Milchunas DG, Mosier AR, Morgan JA, Lecain DR, King JY, Nelson JA. 2005b. Root production and tissue quality in a shortgrass steppe exposed to elevated CO2: using a new ingrowth method. Plant Soil 268:111–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mueller IM. 1941. An experimental study of rhizomes of certain prairie plants. Ecol Monogr 11:165–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mueller IM, Weaver JE. 1942. Relative drought resistance of seedlings of dominant prairie grasses. Ecology 23:387–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Noy-Meir I. 1973. Desert ecosystems: environment and producers. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 4:25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Parton W, Morgan J, Smith D, Del Grosso S, Prihodko L, LeCain D, Kelly R, Lutz S. 2011. Impact of precipitation dynamics on net ecosystem productivity. Glob Chang Biol. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02611.x.Google Scholar
  43. Paruelo JM, Lauenroth WK, Burke IC, Sala OE. 1999. Grassland precipitation: use efficiency varies across a resource gradient. Ecosystems 2:64–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Paruelo JM, Lauenroth WK, Roset PA. 2000. Estimating aboveground plant biomass using a photographic technique. J Range Manage 53:190–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Przeszlowska A, Trlica MJ, Weltz MA. 2009. Near-ground remote sensing of green area index on the shortgrass prairie. Rangel Ecol Manage 59:422–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rosenzweig ML. 1968. Net primary productivity of terrestrial communities: prediction from climatological data. Am Nat 102:67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sala OE, Austin AT. 2000. Methods of estimating aboveground net primary productivity. In: Sala OE, Jackson RB, Mooney HA, Howarth RW, Eds. Methods in ecosystem science. New York: Springer-Verlag. p 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sala OE, Lauenroth WK. 1982. Small rainfall events: an ecological role in semiarid regions. Oecologia 53:301–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sala OE, Parton WJ, Joyce LA, Lauenroth WK. 1988. Primary production of the central grassland region of the United States. Ecology 69:40–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scurlock JMO, Hall DO. 1998. The global carbon sink: a grassland perspective. Glob Chang Biol 4:229–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sims PL, Singh JS, Lauenroth WK. 1978. The structure and function of ten western North American grasslands: I. abiotic and vegetational characteristics. J Ecol 66:251–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. USDA, NRCS. 2011. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.
  53. 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
  54. Weaver JE. 1954. North American Prairie. Lincoln, NE, USA: Johnsen Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  55. Weaver JE, Albertson FW. 1936. Effects on the great drought on the prairies of Iowa, Nebraska, and Kansas. Ecology 17:567–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weltzin JF, Loik ME, Schwinning S, Williams DG, Fay PA, Haddad BM, Harte J, Huxman TE, Knapp AK, Lin G, 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
  57. White RP, Murray S, Rohweder M, Prince SD, Thompson KMJ. 2000. Grassland ecosystems. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  58. Yahdjian L, Sala O. 2002. A rainout shelter design for intercepting different amounts of rainfall. Oecologia 133:95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yahdjian L, Sala OE. 2006. Vegetation structure constrains primary production response to water availability in the Patagonian steppe. Ecology 87:952–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zavaleta ES, Shaw MR, Chiariello NR, Thomas BD, Cleland EE, Field CB, Mooney HA. 2003. Grassland responses to three years of elevated temperature, CO2, precipitation, and N deposition. Ecol Monogr 73:585–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kerry M. Byrne
    • 1
  • William K. Lauenroth
    • 2
  • Peter B. Adler
    • 3
  1. 1.Graduate Degree Program in EcologyColorado State UniversityColoradoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Botany and Program in EcologyUniversity of WyomingWyomingUSA
  3. 3.Department of Wildland Resources and the Ecology CenterUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations