A larger investment into exudation by competitive versus conservative plants is connected to more coupled plant–microbe N cycling
- 504 Downloads
Plant–microbe interactions actively control nitrogen (N) cycling in the ecosystem. We hypothesize that the investment into exudation and the coupling of plant–microbe N cycling will be larger in competitive plants compared to the more conservative species. Root exudation of competitive (Glyceria maxima) and conservative (Carex acuta) plants was estimated by 13C-CO2 labeling. Seasonal changes in plant, microbial, and soil soluble N pools as well as potential net microbial N transformations were determined to interconnect the C and N cycling within grassland ecosystems dominated by these species. We showed that competitive Glyceria, as compared to conservative Carex, appears to affect soil N cycling through a more direct temporal and spatial influence on soil microbes due to a larger investment into root exudation. This makes the system highly dynamic, with faster soil N cycling and pronounced seasonal N redistribution between plants and microbes. The conservative Carex, irrespective of its larger root system, invested less C to exudation. In this case, the plant–microbe relationships appear to be less-coupled in time and space with the plant N supply likely relying mainly on the relatively slow microbial mineralization of organic matter than on rhizosphere priming effect. We showed that differences in soil N cycling associated with competitive versus conservative plants are closely connected with their different investments into root exudation, which govern the coupling of plant–microbe interactions in time and space.
KeywordsPlant growth strategy Exudation Grassland Labile N Microbial biomass The plant–microbe interaction
Financial support was provided by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (526/09/1545) and by the Grant Agency of University of South Bohemia (146/2013/P). We thank Terezia Rihova and Dan Hisem for technical support and Jiri Barta, Marketa Applova, Katerina Machalova-Zemanova, Karolina Tahovska and Jiri Mach for help with laboratory sample preparations.
- Aerts R, Chapin FS (2000) The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: a re-evaluation of processes and patterns. In: Fitter AH, Raffaelli DG (eds) Advances in ecological research. Elsevier Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, pp 1–67Google Scholar
- Friesen ML, Porter SS, Stark SC, von Wettberg EJ, Sachs JL, Martinez-Romero E (2011) Microbially mediated plant functional traits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 42:23–46Google Scholar
- Grigulis K, Lavorel S, Krainer U, Legay N, Baxendale C, Dumont M, Kastl E, Arnoldi C, Bardgett RD, Poly F, Pommier T, Schloter M, Tappeiner U, Bahn M, Clement JC (2013) Relative contributions of plant traits and soil microbial properties to mountain grassland ecosystem services. J Ecol 101:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kastovska E, Picek T, Barta J, Mach J, Cajthaml T, Edwards K (2012) Nutrient addition retards decomposition and C immobilization in two wet grasslands. Hydrobiologia 692:67–81Google Scholar
- Paul EA, Juma NG (1981) Mineralization and immobilization of soil N by microorganisms. In: Clark CR, Rosswall T (eds) Terrestrial nitrogen cycles, processes, ecosystem, strategies and management impacts. Swedish Natural Science Research Council, Stockholm, pp 179–195Google Scholar
- Tilman D (1990) Mechanisms of plant competition for nutrients: the elements of a predictive theory of competition. In: Grace JB, Tilman D (eds) Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, p 484Google Scholar
- Wedin DA, Tilman D (1990) Species effect on nitrogen cycling—a test with perennial grasses. Oecologia 84:433–441Google Scholar