Advertisement

Biogeochemistry

, Volume 142, Issue 3, pp 413–423 | Cite as

P and K additions enhance canopy N retention and accelerate the associated leaching

  • Masaaki ChiwaEmail author
  • Lucy J. Sheppard
  • Ian D. Leith
  • Sarah R. Leeson
  • Y. Sim Tang
  • J. Neil Cape
Article

Abstract

This study evaluated the interactive effects of combined phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) additions on canopy nitrogen (N) retention (CNR) and subsequent canopy leaching at a long-term N manipulation site on Whim bog in south Scotland. Ambient deposition is 8 kg N ha−1 year−1 and an additional 8, 24, and 56 kg N ha−1 year−1 of either ammonium (NH4+) or nitrate (NO3) with or without P and K has been applied over 11 years. Throughfall N deposition below Calluna vulgaris and foliar N and P concentrations were assessed. Results showed that 60% for low dose and 53% for high dose of NO3 contrasting with 80% for low dose and 38% for high dose of NH4+ onto Calluna was retained by Calluna canopy. The CNR was enhanced by P and K addition in which 84% of NO3 and 83% of NH4+ for high dose were retained. CNR for NO3 increased the canopy leaching of dissolved organic N (DON) and associated organic anions. NH4+ retention increased canopy leaching of magnesium and calcium through ion exchange. Even over 11-years N exposure without P and K, foliage N:P ratio of Calluna did not increase, suggesting that N exposure did not lead to N saturation of Calluna at Whim bog. Our study concluded that increases in P and K availability enhance CNR of Calluna but accelerate the associated canopy leaching of DON and base cations, depending on foliar N status.

Keywords

Manipulation experiment Peatland Calluna vulgaris Dissolved organic nitrogen Base cations Long-term study 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by NERC (CEH Project NEC04591, Defra (CPEA 18), the EU Projects NitroEurope IP (017841 (GOCE)) and ÉCLAIRE (FP7-ENV-2011 Grant 282910), and JSPS KAKENHI (JP26450198 and JP17H03833).

References

  1. Adriaenssens S, Staelens J, Wuyts K, de Schrijver A, Van Wittenberghe S, Wuytack T, Kardel F, Verheyen K, Samson R, Boeckx P (2011) Foliar nitrogen uptake from wet deposition and the relation with leaf wettability and water storage capacity. Water Air Soil Pollut 219(1–4):43–57Google Scholar
  2. Aguillaume L, Izquieta-Rojano S, García-Gómez H, Elustondo D, Santamaría JM, Alonso R, Avila A (2017) Dry deposition and canopy uptake in Mediterranean holm-oak forests estimated with a canopy budget model: a focus on N estimations. Atmos Environ 152:191–200Google Scholar
  3. Appelo CAJ, Postma D (1994) Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution. AA Balkema, AvereestGoogle Scholar
  4. Avila A, Aguillaume L, Izquieta-Rojano S, Garcia-Gomez H, Elustondo D, Santamaria JM, Alonso R (2017) Quantitative study on nitrogen deposition and canopy retention in Mediterranean evergreen forests. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 24(34):26213–26226Google Scholar
  5. Bobbink R, Heil GW, Raessen M (1992) Atmospheric deposition and canopy exchange processes in heathland ecosystems. Environ Pollut 75(1):29–37Google Scholar
  6. Bobbink R, Hornung M, Roelofs JGM (1998) The effects of air-borne nitrogen pollutants on species diversity in natural and semi-natural European vegetation. J Ecol 86(5):717–738Google Scholar
  7. Boyce RL, Mccune DC, Berlyn GP (1991) A comparison of foliar wettability of red spruce and balsam fir growing at high elevation. New Phytol 117:543–555Google Scholar
  8. Bragazza L, Limpens J, Gerdol R, Grosvernier P, Hajek M, Hajek T, Hajkova P, Hansen I, Iacumin P, Kutnar L, Rydin H, Tahvanainen T (2005) Nitrogen concentration and delta15N signature of ombrotrophic Sphagnum mosses at different N deposition levels in Europe. Glob Change Biol 11(1):106–114Google Scholar
  9. Brumme R, Leimcke U, Matzner E (1992) Interception and uptake of NH4 + and NO3 from wet deposition by aboveground parts of young beech (Fagus sylvatica L) trees. Plant Soil 142:273–279Google Scholar
  10. Cape JN, Dunster A, Crossley A, Sheppard LJ, Harvey FJ (2001) Throughfall chemistry in a Sitka spruce plantation in response to six different simulated polluted mist treatments. Water Air Soil Pollut 130(1–4):619–624Google Scholar
  11. Cape JN, Sheppard LJ, Crossley A, van Dijk N, Tang YS (2010) Experimental field estimation of organic nitrogen formation in tree canopies. Environ Pollut 158(9):2926–2933Google Scholar
  12. Carfrae JA, Sheppard LJ, Raven JA, Leith ID, Crossley A (2007) Potassium and phosphorus additions modify the response of Sphagnum capillifolium growing on a Scottish ombrotrophic bog to enhanced nitrogen deposition. Appl Geochem 22(6):1111–1121Google Scholar
  13. Chiwa M, Crossley A, Sheppard LJ, Sakugawa H, Cape JN (2004) Throughfall chemistry and canopy interactions in a Sitka spruce plantation sprayed with six different simulated polluted mist treatments. Environ Pollut 127(1):57–64Google Scholar
  14. Chiwa M, Matsuda T, Nakatani N, Kobayashi T, Kume A, Sakugawa H (2012) Effects of canopy N uptake on foliar CO2 assimilation rates and biomass production and allocation in Japanese red pine seedlings. Can J For Res 42(7):1395–1403Google Scholar
  15. Chiwa M, Sheppard LJ, Leith ID, Leeson SR, Tang YS, Cape JN (2016) Sphagnum can ‘filter’ N deposition, but effects on the plant and pore water depend on the N form. Sci Total Environ 559:113–120Google Scholar
  16. Chiwa M, Sheppard LJ, Leith ID, Leeson SR, Tang YS, Cape JN (2018) Long-term interactive effects of N addition with P and K availability on N status of Sphagnum. Environ Pollut 237:468–472Google Scholar
  17. Dezi S, Medlyn BE, Tonon G, Magnani F (2010) The effect of nitrogen deposition on forest carbon sequestration: a model-based analysis. Glob Change Biol 16(5):1470–1486Google Scholar
  18. Eilers G, Brumme R, Matzner E (1992) Aboveground N-uptake from wet deposition by norway spruce (Picea-abies karst). For Ecol Manag 51(1–3):239–249Google Scholar
  19. Eppinga MB, Rietkerk M, Borren W, Lapshina ED, Bleuten W, Wassen MJ (2008) Regular surface patterning of peatlands: confronting theory with field data. Ecosystems 11(4):520–536Google Scholar
  20. Gaige E, Dail DB, Hollinger DY, Davidson EA, Fernandez IJ, Sievering H, White A, Halteman W (2007) Changes in canopy processes following whole-forest canopy nitrogen fertilization of a mature spruce-hemlock forest. Ecosystems 10(7):1133–1147Google Scholar
  21. Galloway JN, Townsend AR, Erisman JW, Bekunda M, Cai ZC, Freney JR, Martinelli LA, Seitzinger SP, Sutton MA (2008) Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 320(5878):889–892Google Scholar
  22. Gore AJP (1983) Ecosystems of the world 4A mires: swamp, bog, fen and moor. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  23. Güsewell S (2004) N: P ratios in terrestrial plants: variation and functional significance. New Phytol 164(2):243–266Google Scholar
  24. Hagen-Thorn A, Varnagiryte I, Nihlgard B, Armolaitis K (2006) Autumn nutrient resorption and losses in four deciduous forest tree species. For Ecol Manag 228:33–39Google Scholar
  25. Houle D, Ouimet R, Paquin R, Laflamme JG (1999) Interactions of atmospheric deposition with a mixed hardwood and a coniferous forest canopy at the Lake Clair Watershed (Duchesnay, Quebec). Can J For Res 29(12):1944–1957Google Scholar
  26. Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM (1996) The vegetation N: P ratio: a new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. J Appl Ecol 33(6):1441–1450Google Scholar
  27. Krupa SV (2003) Effects of atmospheric ammonia (NH3) on terrestrial vegetation: a review. Environ Pollut 124(2):179–221Google Scholar
  28. Leith I, Sheppard L, Fowler D, Cape JN, Jones M, Crossley A, Hargreaves K, Tang YS, Theobald M, Sutton M (2004) Quantifying dry NH3 deposition to an ombrotrophic bog from an automated NH3 field release system. Water Air Soil Pollut 4(6):207–218Google Scholar
  29. Levia DF, Frost EE (2006) Variability of throughfall volume and solute inputs in wooded ecosystems. Prog Phys Geogr 30(5):605–632Google Scholar
  30. Li W, Gao F, Liao X (2013) Estimating chemical exchange between atmospheric deposition and forest canopy in Guizhou, China. J Environ Qual 42(2):332–340Google Scholar
  31. Limpens J, Berendse F, Klees H (2004) How phosphorus availability affects the impact of nitrogen deposition on Sphagnum and vascular plants in Bogs. Ecosystems 7(8):793–804Google Scholar
  32. Liu XY, Koba K, Makabe A, Li XD, Yoh M, Liu CQ (2013) Ammonium first: natural mosses prefer atmospheric ammonium but vary utilization of dissolved organic nitrogen depending on habitat and nitrogen deposition. New Phytol 199(2):407–419Google Scholar
  33. Lovett GM, Lindberg SE (1993) Atmospheric deposition and canopy interactions of nitrogen in forests. Can J For Res 23(8):1603–1616Google Scholar
  34. Lovett GM, Nolan SS, Driscoll CT, Fahey TJ (1996) Factors regulating throughfall flux in a new New-Hampshire forested landscape. Can J For Res 26(12):2134–2144Google Scholar
  35. Maistry PM, Muasya AM, Valentine AJ, Chimphango SBM (2015) Increasing nitrogen supply stimulates phosphorus acquisition mechanisms in the fynbos species Aspalathus linearis. Funct Plant Biol 42(1):52–62Google Scholar
  36. Manninen S, Woods C, Leith ID, Sheppard LJ (2011) Physiological and morphological effects of long-term ammonium or nitrate deposition on the green and red (shade and open grown) Sphagnum capillifolium. Environ Exp Bot 72(2):140–148Google Scholar
  37. Marklein AR, Houlton BZ (2012) Nitrogen inputs accelerate phosphorus cycling rates across a wide variety of terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytol 193(3):696–704Google Scholar
  38. Paulissen MPCP, Van Der Ven PJM, Dees AJ, Bobbink R (2004) Differential effects of nitrate and ammonium on three fen bryophyte species in relation to pollutant nitrogen input. New Phytol 164(3):451–458Google Scholar
  39. Pinkalski C, Jensen K-MV, Damgaard C, Offenberg J, McCulley R (2018) Foliar uptake of nitrogen from ant faecal droplets: an overlooked service to ant-plants. J Ecol 106(1):289–295Google Scholar
  40. Pitcairn CER, Fowler D, Grace J (1995) Deposition of fixed atmospheric nitrogen and foliar nitrogen-content of bryophytes and Calluna-vulgaris (L) Hull. Environ Pollut 88:193–205Google Scholar
  41. Sase H, Takahashi A, Sato M, Kobayashi H, Nakata M, Totsuka T (2008) Seasonal variation in the atmospheric deposition of inorganic constituents and canopy interactions in a Japanese cedar forest. Environ Pollut 152(1):1–10Google Scholar
  42. Sheppard LJ, Crossley A, Leith ID, Hargreaves KJ, Carfrae JA, van Dijk N, Cape JN, Sleep D, Fowler D, Raven JA (2004) An automated wet deposition system to compare the effects of reduced and oxidised N on ombrotrophic bog species: practical considerations. Water Air Soil Pollut 4(6):197–205Google Scholar
  43. Sheppard LJ, Leith ID, Mizunuma T, Cape JN, Crossley A, Leeson S, Sutton MA, van Dijk N, Fowler D (2011) Dry deposition of ammonia gas drives species change faster than wet deposition of ammonium ions: evidence from a long-term field manipulation. Glob Change Biol 17(12):3589–3607Google Scholar
  44. Sheppard LJ, Leith ID, Mizunuma T, Leeson S, Kivimaki S, Neil Cape J, van Dijk N, Leaver D, Sutton MA, Fowler D, Van den Berg LJ, Crossley A, Field C, Smart S (2014) Inertia in an ombrotrophic bog ecosystem in response to 9 years’ realistic perturbation by wet deposition of nitrogen, separated by form. Glob Change Biol 20(2):566–580Google Scholar
  45. Sievering H, Tomaszewski T, Torizzo J (2007) Canopy uptake of atmospheric N deposition at a conifer forest: part I -canopy N budget, photosynthetic efficiency and net ecosystem exchange. Tellus B 59(3):483–492Google Scholar
  46. Staelens J, Houle D, De Schrijver A, Neirynck J, Verheyen K (2008) Calculating dry deposition and canopy exchange with the canopy budget model: review of assumptions and application to two deciduous forests. Water Air Soil Pollut 191(1–4):149–169Google Scholar
  47. Stevens CJ, Manning P, van den Berg LJ, de Graaf MC, Wamelink GW, Boxman AW, Bleeker A, Vergeer P, Arroniz-Crespo M, Limpens J, Lamers LP, Bobbink R, Dorland E (2011) Ecosystem responses to reduced and oxidised nitrogen inputs in European terrestrial habitats. Environ Pollut 159(3):665–676Google Scholar
  48. Tomassen HBM, Smolders AJP, Leon PML, Roelofs JGM (2003) Stimulated growth of Betula pubescens and Molinia caerulea on ombrotrophic bogs: role of high levels of atmospheric nitrogen deposition. J Ecol 91(3):357–370Google Scholar
  49. Tomaszewski T, Sievering H (2007) Canopy uptake of atmospheric N deposition at a conifer forest: Part II—response of chlorophyll fluorescence and gas exchange parameters. Tellus Ser B 59(3):493–501Google Scholar
  50. Tomaszewski T, Boyce RL, Sievering H (2003) Canopy uptake of atmospheric nitrogen and new growth nitrogen requirement at a Colorado subalpine forest. Can J For Res 33(11):2221–2227Google Scholar
  51. Venterink HO, Pieterse NM, Belgers JDM, Wassen MJ, De Ruiter PC (2002) N, P, and K budgets along nutrient availability and productivity gradients in wetlands. Ecol Appl 12(4):1010–1026Google Scholar
  52. Wuyts K, De Schrijver A, Staelens J, Gielis M, Geudens G, Verheyen K (2008) Patterns of throughfall deposition along a transect in forest edges of silver birch and Corsican pine. Can J For Res 38:449–461Google Scholar
  53. Wyers GP, Otjes RP, Slanina J (1993) A continuous flow denuder for the measurement of ambient concentrations and surface fluxes of ammonia. Atmos Environ 27A:2085–2090Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kyushu University ForestKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH)PenicuikUK

Personalised recommendations