Advertisement

Biogeochemistry

, Volume 137, Issue 1–2, pp 127–141 | Cite as

Evidence for the role and fate of water-insoluble condensed tannins in the short-term reduction of carbon loss during litter decay

  • Philip-Edouard Shay
  • C. Peter Constabel
  • J. A. Trofymow
Article

Abstract

Warmer temperatures associated with climate change have the potential to accelerate litter decay and subsequently release large amounts of carbon stored in soils. Condensed tannins are widespread secondary metabolites, which accumulate to high concentrations in many woody plants and play key roles in forest soil nutrient cycles. Future elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations are predicted to reduce nitrogen content and increase tannin concentrations in plant tissues, thus reducing litter quality for microbial communities and slowing decomposition rates. How the distinct condensed tannin fractions (water-soluble, acetone:MeOH-soluble and solvent-insoluble) impact soil processes, has not been investigated. We tested the impact of condensed tannin and nitrogen concentrations on decay rates of poplar and Douglas-fir litter at sites spanning temperature and moisture gradients in coastal rainshadow forests in British Columbia, Canada. The three condensed tannin fractions were quantified using recent improvements on the butanol-HCl assay. Decay was assessed based on carbon remaining, while changes in litter chemistry were primarily observed using two methods for proximate chemical analyses. After 0.6 and 1 year of decay, more carbon remained in poplar litter with high, compared to low, condensed tannin concentrations. By contrast, more carbon remained in Douglas fir litter than poplar litter during this period, despite lower condensed tannin concentrations. Rapid early decay was especially attributed to loss of soluble compounds, including water-soluble condensed tannins. Water-insoluble condensed tannin fractions, which were transformed to acid-unhydrolyzable residues over time, were associated with reduced carbon loss in high condensed tannin litter.

Keywords

Poplar Douglas-fir Proanthocyanidin Proximate chemistry Butanol-HCl Carbon sequestration 

Abbreviations

ADC

Acid-determined cellulose

ADL

Acid-determined “lignin”

AHF

Acid-hydrolyzable fraction

AUR

Acid-unhydrolyzable residue

C

Carbon

CT

Condensed tannins

LT

Low-condensed tannin treatment

LN

Low-nitrogen treatment

HT

High-condensed tannin treatment

HN

High-nitrogen treatment

N

Nitrogen

NPE

Non-polarizable extractables

WSE

Water-soluble extractables

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Nicholas von Wittgenstein for preparing litter bags, David Dunn and Rebecca Dixon (Chemical Services Laboratory, Pacific Forestry Centre, NRCan) for proximate chemical analyses, and Dr. Caroline M. Preston (Pacific Forestry Centre, NRCan) for feedback and insightful conversations. Special thanks to Professor Thomas G. Whitham and the cottonwood research group at Northern Arizona University for the poplar litter samples and associated genetic and chemical information. This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada in the form of Discovery Grants to CPC and the NSERC CREATE Program in Forests and Climate Change.

Supplementary material

10533_2017_406_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (431 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 430 kb)

References

  1. Arranz S, Saura-Calixto F, Shaha S, Kroon PA (2009) High contents of nonextractable polyphenols in fruits suggest that polyphenol contents of plant foods have been underestimated. J Agric Food Chem 57:7298–7303.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf9016652 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayres E, Steltzer H, Simmons BL, Simpson RT, Steinweg JM, Wallenstein MD et al (2009) Home-field advantage accelerates leaf litter decomposition in forests. Soil Biol Biochem 41:606–610.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.12.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbehenn RV, Constabel CP (2011) Tannins in plant-herbivore interactions. Phytochemistry 72:1551–1565.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.01.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhat TK, Singh B, Sharma OP (1998) Microbial degradation of tannins—a current perspective. Biodegradation 9:343–357.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008397506963 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Constabel CP, Lindroth RL (2010) The impact of genomics on advances in herbivore defense and secondary metabolism in Populus. In: Jansson S, Bhalaero R, Groover A (eds) Genetics and genomics of Populus, plant genetics and genomics: crops and models. Springer Science and Business Media, New York, pp 279–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cork SJ, Krockenberger AK (1991) Methods and pitfalls of extracting condensed tannins and other phenolics from plants—insights from investigations on eucalyptus leaves. J Chem Ecol 17:123–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00994426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Donaldson JR, Stevens MT, Barnhill HR, Lindroth RL (2006) Age-related shifts in leaf chemistry of clonal aspen (Populus tremuloides). J Chem Ecol 32:1415–1429.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-006-9059-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fierer N, Schimel JP, Cates RG, Zou JP (2001) Influence of balsam poplar tannin fractions on carbon and nitrogen dynamics in Alaskan taiga floodplain soils. Soil Biol Biochem 33:1827–1839.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0038-0717(01)00111-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grabber JH, Zeller WE, Mueller-Harvey I (2013) Acetone enhances the direct analysis of procyanidin- and prodelphinidin-based condensed tannins in Lotus species by the butanol-HCl-iron assay. J Agric Food Chem 61:2669–2678.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf304158m CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harding SA, Jiang HY, Jeong ML, Casado FL, Lin HW, Tsai CJ (2005) Functional genomics analysis of foliar condensed tannin and phenolic glycoside regulation in natural cottonwood hybrids. Tree Physiol 25:1475–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hu S, Chapin FS, Firestone MK, Field CB, Chiariello NR (2001) Nitrogen limitation of microbial decomposition in a grassland under elevated CO2. Nature 409:188–191.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35051576 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kraus TEC, Dahlgren RA, Zasoski RJ (2003a) Tannins in nutrient dynamics of forest ecosystems—a review. Plant Soil 256:41–66.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026206511084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kraus TEC, Yu Z, Preston CM, Dahlgren RA, Zasoski RJ (2003b) Linking chemical reactivity and protein precipitation to structural characteristics of foliar tannins. J Chem Ecol 29:703–730.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022876804925 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kraus TEC, Zasoski RJ, Dahlgren RA (2004) Fertility and pH effects on polyphenol and condensed tannin concentrations in foliage and roots. Plant Soil 262:95–109.  https://doi.org/10.1023/b:plso.0000037021.41066.79 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lin YM, Liu JW, Xiang P, Lin P, Ye GF, Sternberg L (2006) Tannin dynamics of propagules and leaves of Kandelia candel and Bruguiera gymnorrhiza in the Jiulong River Estuary, Fujian, China. Biogeochemistry 78:343–359.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-005-4427-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lin YM, Liu JW, Xiang P, Lin P, Ding ZH, Sternberg LDL (2007) Tannins and nitrogen dynamics in mangrove leaves at different age and decay stages (Jiulong River Estuary, China). Hydrobiologia 583:285–295.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-006-0568-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindroth RL, Hwang SY (1996) Clonal variation in foliar chemistry of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx). Biochem Syst Ecol 24:357–364.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-1978(96)00043-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lindroth RL, Osier TL, Barnhill HRH, Wood SA (2002) Effects of genotype and nutrient availability on phytochemistry of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) during leaf senescence. Biochem Syst Ecol 30:297–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0305-1978(01)00088-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu LL, King JS, Giardina CP (2005) Effects of elevated concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3 on leaf litter production and chemistry in trembling aspen and paper birch communities. Tree Physiol 25:1511–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu LL, King JS, Giardina CP, Booker FL (2009) The influence of chemistry, production and community composition on leaf litter decomposition under elevated atmospheric CO2 and tropospheric O3 in a Northern hardwood ecosystem. Ecosystems 12:401–416.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-009-9231-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Madritch MD, Hunter MD (2002) Phenotypic diversity influences ecosystem functioning in an oak sandhills community. Ecology 83:2084–2090.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3072039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Madritch MD, Lindroth RL (2015) Condensed tannins increase nitrogen recovery by trees following insect defoliation. New Phytol 208:410–420.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13444 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Madritch M, Donaldson JR, Lindroth RL (2006) Genetic identity of Populus tremuloides litter influences decomposition and nutrient release in a mixed forest stand. Ecosystems 9:528–537.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-006-0008-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mané C, Souquet JM, Olle D, Verries C, Veran F, Mazerolles G et al (2007) Optimization of simultaneous flavanol, phenolic acid, and anthocyanin extraction from grapes using an experimental design: application to the characterization of Champagne grape varieties. J Agric Food Chem 55:7224–7233.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf071301w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moore TR, Trofymow JA, Taylor B, Prescott C, Camire C, Duschene L, Fyles J, Kozak L, Kranabetter M, Morrison I, Siltanen M, Smith S, Titus B, Visser S, Wein R, Zoltai S (1999) Rates of litter decomposition in Canadian forests. Glob Change Biol 5:75–82.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00224.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nierop KGJ, Verstraten JM, Tietema A, Westerveld JW, Wartenbergh PE (2006) Short- and long-term tannin induced carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus dynamics in Corsican pine litter. Biogeochemistry 79:275–296.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-005-5274-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Norby RJ, Cotrufo MF, Ineson P, O’Neill EG, Canadell JG (2001) Elevated CO2, litter chemistry, and decomposition: a synthesis. Oecologia 127:153–165.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420000615 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Norris CE, Preston CM, Hogg KE, Titus BD (2011) The influence of condensed tannin structure on rate of microbial mineralization and reactivity to chemical assays. J Chem Ecol 37:311–319.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-011-9921-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Osier TL, Lindroth RL (2006) Genotype and environment determine allocation to and costs of resistance in quaking aspen. Oecologia 148:293–303.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0373-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parsons WFJ, Bockheim JG, Lindroth RL (2008) Independent, interactive, and species-specific responses of leaf litter decomposition to elevated CO2 and O3 in a northern hardwood forest. Ecosystems 11:505–519.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-008-9148-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Perez-Jimenez J, Torres JL (2011) Analysis of nonextractable phenolic compounds in foods: the current state of the art. J Agric Food Chem 59:12713–12724.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf203372w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Perez-Jimenez J, Arranz S, Saura-Calixto F (2009) Proanthocyanidin content in foods is largely underestimated in the literature data: an approach to quantification of the missing proanthocyanidins. Food Res Int 42:1381–1388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.07.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Porter LJ, Hrstich LN, Chan BG (1986) The conversion of procyanidins and prodelphinidins to cyanidin and delphinidin. Phytochemistry 25:223–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Preston CM, Trofymow JA (2015) The chemistry of some foliar litters and their sequential proximate analysis fractions. Biogeochemistry 126:197–209.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-015-0152-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Preston CM, Trofymow JA, Sayer BG, Niu JN (1997) 13C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy with cross-polarization and magic-angle spinning investigation of the proximate-analysis fractions used to assess litter quality in decomposition studies. Can J Bot-Rev Can Bot 75:1601–1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Preston CM, Nault JR, Trofymow JA (2009a) Chemical changes during 6 years of decomposition of 11 litters in some Canadian forest sites. Part 2. 13C abundance, solid-state 13C NMR spectroscopy and the meaning of “lignin”. Ecosystems 12:1078–1102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-009-9267-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Preston CM, Nault JR, Trofymow JA, Smyth C, Grp CW (2009b) Chemical changes during 6 years of decomposition of 11 litters in some Canadian forest sites. Part 1. Elemental composition, tannins, phenolics, and proximate fractions. Ecosystems 12:1053–1077.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-009-9266-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  39. Rehill BJ, Whitham TG, Martinsen GD, Schweitzer JA, Bailey JK, Lindroth RL (2006) Developmental trajectories in cottonwood phytochemistry. J Chem Ecol 32:2269–2285.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-006-9141-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ryan MG, Melillo JM, Ricca A (1990) A comparison of methods for determining proximate carbon fractions of forest litter. Can J For Res-Rev Can Rech For 20:166–171.  https://doi.org/10.1139/x90-023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Scalbert A (1991) Antimicrobial properties of tannins. Phytochemistry 30:3875–3883.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9422(91)83426-l CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schimel JP, Bennett J (2004) Nitrogen mineralization: challenges of a changing paradigm. Ecology 85:591–602.  https://doi.org/10.1890/03-8002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schimel JP, VanCleve K, Cates RG, Clausen TP, Reichardt PB (1996) Effects of balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) tannins and low molecular weight phenolics on microbial activity in taiga floodplain soil: implications for changes in N cycling during succession. Can J Bot-Rev Can Bot 74:84–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schofield P, Hagerman AE, Harold A (1998) Loss of tannins and other phenolics from willow leaf litter. J of Chem Ecol 24:1409–1421.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021287018787 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schofield P, Mbugua DM, Pell AN (2001) Analysis of condensed tannins: a review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 91:21–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-8401(01)00228-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schweitzer JA, Bailey JK, Rehill BJ, Martinsen GD, Hart SC, Lindroth RL et al (2004) Genetically based trait in a dominant tree affects ecosystem processes. Ecol Lett 7:127–134.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2003.00562.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schweitzer JA, Madritch MD, Bailey JK, LeRoy CJ, Fischer DG, Rehill BJ et al (2008) From genes to ecosystems: the genetic basis of condensed tannins and their role in nutrient regulation in a Populus model system. Ecosystems 11:1005–1020.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-008-9173-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Scioneaux AN, Schmidt MA, Moore MA, Lindroth RL, Wooley SC, Hagerman AE (2011) Qualitative variation in proanthocyanidin composition of Populus species and hybrids: genetics is the key. J Chem Ecol 37:57–70.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-010-9887-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shay PE, Winder RS, Trofymow JA (2015) Nutrient-cycling microbes in coastal Douglas-fir forests: regional-scale correlation between communities, in situ climate, and other factors. Front Microbiol.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.01097 Google Scholar
  50. Shay PE, Trofymow JA, Constabel CP (2017) An improved butanol-HCl assay for quantification of water-soluble, acetone:methanol-soluble, and insoluble proanthocyanidins (condensed tannins). Plant Methods 13:63.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13007-017-0213-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tarascou I, Souquet JM, Mazauric JP, Carrillo S, Coq S, Canon F et al (2010) The hidden face of food phenolic composition. Arch Biochem Biophys 501:16–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2010.03.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Terrill TH, Rowan AM, Douglas GB, Barry TN (1992) Determination of extractable and bound condensed tannin concentrations in forage plants, protein-concentrate meals and cereal-grains. J Sci Food Agric 58:321–329.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740580306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Trofymow JA, CIDET Working Group (1998) The Canadian Intersite Decomposition Experiment (CIDET): project and site establishment report. Pacific Forestry Centre, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  54. Trofymow JA, Moore TR, Titus B, Prescott C, Morrison I, Siltanen M, Smith S, Fyles J, Wein R, Camire C, Duschene L, Kozak L, Kranabetter M, Visser S (2002) Rates of litter decomposition over six years in Canadian forests: influence of litter quality and climate. Can J For Res 32:789–804.  https://doi.org/10.1139/x01-117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Whitham TG, Bailey JK, Schweitzer JA, Shuster SM, Bangert RK, Leroy CJ et al (2006) A framework for community and ecosystem genetics: from genes to ecosystems. Nat Rev Genet 7:510–523.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1877 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Whitham TG, DiFazio SP, Schweitzer JA, Shuster SM, Allan GJ, Bailey JK et al (2008) Perspective—extending genomics to natural communities and ecosystems. Science 320:492–495.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153918 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wolfe RM, Terrill TH, Muir JP (2008) Drying method and origin of standard affect condensed tannin (CT) concentrations in perennial herbaceous legumes using simplified butanol-HCl CT analysis. J Sci Food Agric 88:1060–1067.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Yu Z, Dahlgren RA (2000) Evaluation of methods for measuring polyphenols in conifer foliage. J Chem Ecol 26:2119–2140.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005568416040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang LH, Lin YM, Ye GF, Liu XW, Lin GH (2008) Changes in the N and P concentrations, N:P ratios, and tannin content in Casuarina equisetifolia branchlets during development and senescence. J For Res 13:302–311.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-008-0081-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhou HC, Tam NFY, Lin YM, Wei SD, Li YY (2012) Changes of condensed tannins during decomposition of leaves of Kandelia obovata in a subtropical mangrove swamp in China. Soil Biol Biochem 44:113–121.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.09.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, Centre for Forest BiologyUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry CentreNatural Resources CanadaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations