Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How do Biotic and Abiotic Factors Regulate Soil Enzyme Activities at Plot and Microplot Scales Under Afforestation?

  • Published:
Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Afforestation can greatly affect soil enzymes which are tightly associated with soil nutrient cycling. However, the spatial variations in enzyme activity (EA) in plantation forests and the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. The main goal of this study was to determine how the drivers including the biotic (for example, plant traits and microbial properties) and abiotic factors (for example, soil properties) best regulate spatial variations in EA (β-glucosidase, leucine aminopeptidase and acid phosphatase) in three selected sites [woodland, shrubland and adjacent open areas (that is, control)] in Central China. Specifically, we tried to determine: (1) whether the drivers of EA variations vary between woodland and shrubland sites at the plot scale (100 m2) and (2) whether the drivers vary depending on the presence of tree patch (tree patch microplot vs. open-interpatch microplot) at the microplot scale (1 m2) within sites. A spatially nested sampling was conducted within each site via a series of partial Mantel tests to examine the correlations between EA and the environmental factors. For each site, similar spatial distribution trends were observed for the three kinds of enzymes at the plot scale. Our results showed that the tree distribution-induced shifts in litter and root biomass, soil pH and microbial community structure primarily controlled the spatial variations in EA. Specifically, soil EA was significantly correlated with litter and root biomass in the woodland site at the plot scale and primarily dependent on soil pH and microbial properties in the shrubland site. In contrast, the drivers of EA variations at the microplot scale are inconsistent between the tree patch microplot and the interpatch microplot within sites. Additionally, soil EA was not correlated with any factor in the open area. Taken together, our results reveal a shift in drivers of EA under afforestation and a profound impact of tree patch on these drivers at the plot scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acosta-Martinez V, Cruz L, Sotomayor-Ramirez D, Pérez-Alegría L. 2007. Enzyme activities as affected by soil properties and land use in a tropical watershed. Applied Soil Ecology 35:35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison S, Weintraub M, Gartner T, Waldrop M. 2011. Evolutionary-economic principles as regulators of soil enzyme production and ecosystem function. In: Shukla G, Varma A, Eds. Soil enzymology. Berlin: Springer. p 229–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldrian P. 2014. Distribution of extracellular enzymes in soils: spatial heterogeneity and determining factors at various scales. Soil Science Society of America Journal 78:11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldrian P, Šnajdr J. 2011. Lignocellulose-degrading enzymes in soils. In: Shukla G, Varma A, Eds. Soil enzymology. Berlin: Springer. p 167–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldrian P, Merhautová V, Cajthaml T, Petránková M, Šnajdr J. 2010. Small-scale distribution of extracellular enzymes, fungal, and bacterial biomass in Quercus petraea forest topsoil. Biology and Fertility of Soils 46:717–26.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee S, Siciliano SD. 2012. Spatially tripartite interactions of denitrifiers in arctic ecosystems: activities, functional groups and soil resources. Environmental Microbiology 14:2601–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee S, Bora S, Thrall PH, Richardson AE. 2016. Soil C and N as causal factors of spatial variation in extracellular enzyme activity across grassland-woodland ecotones. Applied Soil Ecology 105:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeddinghaus RS, Nunan N, Berner D, Marhan S, Kandeler E. 2015. Do general spatial relationships for microbial biomass and soil enzyme activities exist in temperate grassland soils? Soil Biology and Biochemistry 88:430–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bossio DA, Scow KM. 1998. Impacts of carbon and flooding on soil microbial communities: phospholipid fatty acid profiles and substrate utilization patterns. Microbial Ecology 35:265–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles TM, Acosta-Martínez V, Calderón F, Jackson LE. 2014. Soil enzyme activities, microbial communities, and carbon and nitrogen availability in organic agroecosystems across an intensively-managed agricultural landscape. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 68:252–62.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brzezińska M, Lipiec J, Frąc M, Oszust K, Szarlip P, Turski M. 2018. Quantitative interactions between total and specific enzyme activities and C and N contents in earthworm-affected pear orchard soil. Land Degradation and Development 29:3379–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns RG. 1982. Enzyme activity in soil: location and possible role in microbial activity. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 14:423–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burns RG, DeForest JL, Marxsen J, Sinsabaugh RL, Stromberger ME, Wallenstein MD, Weintraub MN, Zoppini A. 2013. Soil enzymes in a changing environment: current knowledge and future directions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 58:216–34.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carreiro MM, Sinsabaugh RL, Repert DA, Parkhurst DF. 2000. Microbial enzyme shifts explain litter decay responses to simulated nitrogen deposition. Ecology 81:2359–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen LY. 2013. The characteristics of trace element concentrations in the rhizosphere of leguminous plants. Chinese Journal of Soil Science 44:641–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Luo Y, Li J, Zhou X, Cao J, Wang RW, Wang YQ, Shelton B, Jin Z, Walker L, Feng ZZ, Niu SL, Feng WT, Jian SY, Zhou LY. 2017. Costimulation of soil glycosidase activity and soil respiration by nitrogen addition. Global Change Biology 23:1328–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng X, Yang Y, Li M, Dou X, Zhang Q. 2013. The impact of agricultural land use changes on soil organic carbon dynamics in the Danjiangkou Reservoir area of China. Plant and Soil 366:415–24.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries FT, Manning P, Tallowin JRB, Mortimer SR, Pilgrim ES, Harrison KA, Hobbs PJ, Quirk H, Shipley B, Cornelissen JHC, Kattge J, Bardgett RD. 2012. Abiotic drivers and plant traits explain landscape-scale patterns in soil microbial communities. Ecology Letters 15:1230–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deng Q, Cheng X, Yang Y, Zhang Q, Luo Y. 2014. Carbon–nitrogen interactions during afforestation in central china. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 69:119–22.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deng Q, Cheng X, Hui D, Zhang Q, Li M, Zhang Q. 2016. Soil microbial community and its interaction with soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics following afforestation in central China. Science of the Total Environment 541:230–77.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ettema CH, Wardle DA. 2002. Spatial soil ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17:177–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng J, Wu J, Zhang Q, Zhang D, Li Q, Long C, Yang F, Chen Q, Cheng X. 2018. Stimulation of nitrogen-hydrolyzing enzymes in soil aggregates mitigates nitrogen constraint for carbon sequestration following afforestation in subtropical China. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 123:136–44.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fenner N, Williams R, Toberman H, Hughes S, Reynolds B, Freeman C. 2011. Decomposition ‘hotspots’ in a rewetted peatland: implications for water quality and carbon cycling. Hydrobiologia 674:51–66.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization. 1993. Global and national soils and terrain digital databases (SOTER): procedures manual. World soil resources reports. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin RB, Mills AL. 2009. Importance of spatially structured environmental heterogeneity in controlling microbial community composition at small spatial scales in an agricultural field. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 41:1833–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gömöryová E, Gregor J, Pichler V, Gömöry D. 2006. Spatial patterns of soil microbial characteristics and soil moisture in a natural beech forest. Biologia 61:S329–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goovaerts P. 1997. Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden SR, Gutierrez A, Treseder KK. 2013. Changes in soil fungal communities, extracellular enzyme activities, and litter decomposition across a fire chronosequence in Alaskan boreal forests. Ecosystems 16:34–46.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keeler BL, Hobbie SE, Kellogg LE. 2009. Effects of long-term nitrogen addition on microbial enzyme activity in eight forested and grassland sites: implications for litter and soil organic matter decomposition. Ecosystems 12:1–15.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keenan RJ, Reams GA, Achard F, de Freitas JV, Grainger A, Lindquist E. 2015. Dynamics of global forest area: results from the FAO global forest resources assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management 352:9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klironomos JN, Rillig MC, Allen MF. 1999. Designing belowground field experiments with the help of semi-variance and power analyses. Applied Soil Ecology 12:227–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunungo PK, Panda D, Adhya TK, Ramakrishnan B, Rao VR. 2015. Nitrogenase activity and nitrogen-fixing bacteria associated with rhizosphere of rice cultivars with varying N absorption efficiency. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 73:485–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li SY, Zhang QF. 2008. Main eco-environmental problems and revegetation in the Danjiangkou Reservoir water supplying area of the middle route of the South to North water transfer project. China Rural Water and Hydropower 3:1–4 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Matheron G. 1963. Principles of geostatistics. Economic Geology 58:1246–66.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mayor ÁG, Goirán SB, Vallejo VR, Bautista S. 2016. Variation in soil enzyme activity as a function of vegetation amount, type, and spatial structure in fire-prone Mediterranean shrublands. Science of the Total Environment 573:1209–16.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Menyailo OV, Hungate BA, Zech W. 2002. The effect of single tree species on soil microbial activities related to C and N cycling in the Siberian artificial afforestation experiment. Plant and Soil 242:183–96.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nannipieri P, Muccini L, Ciardi C. 1983. Microbial biomass and enzyme activities: production and persistence. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 15:679–85.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nannipieri P, Giagnoni L, Renella G, Puglisi E, Ceccanti B, Masciandaro G, Fornasier F, Moscatelli MC, Marinari S. 2012. Soil enzymology: classical and molecular approaches. Biology and Fertility of Soils 48:743–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nannipieri P, Trasar-Cepeda C, Dick RP. 2018. Soil enzyme activity: a brief history and biochemistry as a basis for appropriate interpretations and meta-analysis. Biology and Fertility of Soils 54:11–19.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, ÓHara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHM, Wagner H. 2013. Vegan: community ecology package. R. package version 2.0–7.

  • Pajares S, Gallardo JF, Masciandaro G, Ceccanti B, Etchevers JD. 2011. Enzyme activity as an indicator of soil quality changes in degraded cultivated Acrisols in the Mexican trans-volcanic belt. Land Degradation and Development 22:373–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park JH, Meusburger K, Jang I, Kang H, Alewell C. 2014. Erosion-induced changes in soil biogeochemical and microbiological properties in Swiss Alpine grasslands. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 69:382–92.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poll C, Thiede A, Wermbter N, Sessitsch A, Kandeler E. 2003. Micro-scale distribution of microorganisms and microbial enzyme activities in a soil with long-term organic amendment. European Journal of Soil Science 54:715–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiesi F, Beheshti A. 2014. Soil specific enzyme activity shows more clearly soil responses to paddy rice cultivation than absolute enzyme activity in primary forests of northwest Iran. Applied Soil Ecology 75:63–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan KM, Nunan N, Boeddinghaus RS, Baumgartner V, Berner D, Boch S, Oelmann Y, Overmann J, Prati D, Schloter M, Schmitt B, Sorkau E, Steffens M, Kandeler E, Marhan S. 2014. Seasonal controls on grassland microbial biogeography: are they governed by plants, abiotic properties or both? Soil Biology and Biochemistry 71:21–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saetre P. 1999. Spatial patterns of ground vegetation, soil microbial biomass and activity in a mixed spruce-birch stand. Ecography 22:183–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saetre P, Bååth E. 2000. Spatial variation and patterns of soil microbial community structure in a mixed spruce–birch stand. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32:909–17.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schimel J, Becerra CA, Blankinship J. 2017. Estimating decay dynamics for enzyme activities in soils from different ecosystems. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 114:5–11.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scotti R, Iovieno P, Zaccardelli M. 2015. Comparative assessment of microbial activity and biomass in paired forest and agricultural soils. Biology and Fertility of Soils 51:1013–19.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh K, Singh B, Singh RR. 2012. Changes in physico-chemical, microbial and enzymatic activities during restoration of degraded sodic land: ecological suitability of mixed forest over monoculture plantation. CATENA 96:57–67.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Foreman CM. 2001. Activity profiles of bacterioplankton in a eutrophic river. Freshwater Biology 46:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Lauber CL, Weintraub MN, Ahmed B, Allison SD, Crenshaw CL, Contosta AR, Cusak D, Frey S, Gallo ME, Gartner TB, Hobbie SE, Holland K, Keeler BL, Powers JS, Stursova M, Takacs-Vesbach C, Waldrop M, Wallenstein M, Dr Z, Zeglin LH. 2008. Stoichiometry of soil enzyme activity at global scale. Ecology Letters 11:1252–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith P, House JI, Bustamante M, Sobocká J, Harper R, Pan G, West P, Clark J, Adhya T, Rumpel C, Paustian K, Kuikman P, Cotrufo MF, Elliott JA, Mcdowell R, Griffiths RI, Asakawa S, Bondeau A, Jain AK, Meersmans J, Pugh TAM. 2016. Global change pressures on soils from land use and management. Global Change Biology 22:1008–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smithwick EA, Turner MG, Metzger KL, Balser TC. 2005. Variation in NH4+ mineralization and microbial communities with stand age in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) forests, Yellowstone National Park (USA). Soil Biology and Biochemistry 37:1546–59.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smouse PE, Long JC, Sokal RR. 1986. Multiple regression and correlation extensions of the Mantel test of matrix correspondence. Systematic Zoology 35:627–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Šnajdr J, Valášková V, Merhautová V, Herinková J, Cajthaml T, Baldrian P. 2008. Spatial variability of enzyme activities and microbial biomass in the upper layers of Quercus petraea forest soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40:2068–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song FB, Han XY, Zhu XC, Herbert SJ. 2012. Response to water stress of soil enzymes and root exudates from drought and non-drought tolerant corn hybrids at different growth stages. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 92:501–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stock SC, Köster M, Dippold MA, Nájera F, Matus F, Merino C, Boy J, Spielvogel S, Gorbushina A, Kuzyakov Y. 2019. Environmental drivers and stoichiometric constraints on enzyme activities in soils from rhizosphere to continental scale. Geoderma 337:973–82.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stursova M, Crenshaw C, Sinsabaugh RL. 2006. Microbial responses to long term N deposition in a semi-arid grassland. Microbial Ecology 51:90–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Štursová M, Bárta J, Šantrůčková H, Baldrian P. 2016. Small-scale spatial heterogeneity of ecosystem properties, microbial community composition and microbial activities in a temperate mountain forest soil. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 92:fiw185.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tang G, Li K. 2013. Tree species controls on soil carbon sequestration and carbon stability following 20 years of afforestation in a valley-type savanna. Forest Ecology and Management 291:13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terzaghi M, Di Iorio A, Montagnoli A, Baesso B, Scippa GS, Chiatante D. 2016. Forest canopy reduction stimulates xylem production and lowers carbon concentration in fine roots of European beech. Forest Ecology and Management 379:81–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theuerl S, Buscot F. 2010. Laccases: toward disentangling their diversity and functions in relation to soil organic matter cycling. Biology and Fertility of Soils 46:215–25.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Smithwick EA, Metzger KL, Tinker DB, Romme WH. 2007. Inorganic nitrogen availability after severe stand-replacing fire in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 104:4782–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Romme WH, Smithwick EAH, Tinker DB, Zhu J. 2011. Variation in aboveground cover influences soil nitrogen availability at fine spatial scales following severe fire in subalpine conifer forests. Ecosystems 14:1081–95.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wallenius K, Rita H, Mikkonen A, Lappi K, Lindström K, Hartikainen H, Raateland A, Niemi RM. 2011. Effects of land use on the level, variation and spatial structure of soil enzyme activities and bacterial communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 43:1464–73.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle DA. 2002. Communities and ecosystems: linking the aboveground and belowground components, Vol. 34Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber P, Bardgett RD. 2011. Influence of single trees on spatial and temporal patterns of belowground properties in native pine forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 43:1372–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HI, Sharpe PJ, Walker J, Penridge LK. 1985. Ecological field theory: a spatial analysis of resource interference among plants. Ecological Modelling 29:215–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Zhang Q, Yang F, Zhang Q, Cheng X. 2017. Does short-term litter input manipulation affect soil respiration and its carbon-isotopic signature in a coniferous forest ecosystem of central China? Applied Soil Ecology 113:45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu G, Chen J, Berninger F, Pumpanen J, Bai J, Yu L, Duan B. 2015. Labile, recalcitrant, microbial carbon and nitrogen and the microbial community composition at two Abies faxoniana forest elevations under elevated temperatures. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 91:1–13.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang QF, Xu ZF, Shen ZH, Li SY, Wang SS. 2009. The Han River watershed management initiative for the south-to-north water transfer project (middle route) of China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 148:369–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang K, Dang H, Zhang Q, Cheng X. 2015. Soil carbon dynamics following land-use change varied with temperature and precipitation gradients: evidence from stable isotopes. Global Change Biology 21:2762–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Wu J, Yang F, Lei Y, Zhang Q, Cheng X. 2016. Alterations in soil microbial community composition and biomass following agricultural land use change. Scientific Reports 6:36587.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Feng J, Wu J, Zhang D, Chen Q, Li Q, Long C, Feyissa A, Cheng X. 2019. Variations in carbon-decomposition enzyme activities respond differently to land use change in central China. Land Degradation and Development 30:459–69.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu M, Tan S, Gu S, Zhang Q. 2010. Characteristics of soil erodibility in the Danjiangkou Reservoir Region, Hubei Province. Chinese Journal of Soil Science 41:434–6.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Erica Smithwick and three anonymous reviewers for suggestions that lead to clarifications of various aspects in an earlier version of the manuscript. This research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31770563, and 31700461) and the “Strategic Priority Research Program B of the Chinese Academy of Sciences” (XDB15010200).

Author information

Author notes

  1. QL and XC designed the study, QL, JF, JW, QZ, WJ and QL performed the experiment, QL analyzed the data and QL, JC and XC wrote the paper.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Aquatic Botany and Watershed Ecology, Wuhan Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Wuhan, 430074, People’s Republic of China

    Qianxi Li, Jiao Feng, Junjun Wu, Wei Jia & Qiaoling Lin

  2. School of Ecology and Environmental Science, Yunnan University, Kunming, 650091, People’s Republic of China

    Qian Zhang & Xiaoli Cheng

  3. Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 10039, People’s Republic of China

    Wei Jia & Qiaoling Lin

  4. Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark

    Ji Chen

Authors
  1. Qianxi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ji Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiao Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Junjun Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qian Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wei Jia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Qiaoling Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xiaoli Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaoli Cheng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Q., Chen, J., Feng, J. et al. How do Biotic and Abiotic Factors Regulate Soil Enzyme Activities at Plot and Microplot Scales Under Afforestation?. Ecosystems 23, 1408–1422 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00477-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00477-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation