Linking plant phytochemistry to soil processes and functions: the usefulness of 13C NMR spectroscopy

  • Fabrizio Cartenì
  • Tushar C. Sarker
  • Giuliano Bonanomi
  • Gaspare Cesarano
  • Alfonso Esposito
  • Guido Incerti
  • Stefano Mazzoleni
  • Virginia Lanzotti
  • Francesco Giannino
Article
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

The organic matter cycle is one of the most fundamental processes in ecosystems affecting the soil and controlling its functions. The soil complex microbiome is made up of thousands of bacterial and hundreds of fungal strains that coexist on the many different available organic carbon sources. In natural plant communities, freshly fallen leaf-litter and dead roots are subject to decomposition by a complex food-web composed of both microbial saprotrophs and invertebrate detritivores. The litter chemical composition varies dramatically among species in relation to plant life forms (conifer, broadleaf, nitrogen-fixing, graminoid) and, within species, with plant organs (leaf, root, woody tissues). This paper reviews the usefulness of advanced chemical technologies to study the composition of both plant litter and organic amendments, supporting the description of their mechanism of action and attention to their potential applications. First, a critical review is presented on the limitations of C/N and lignin/N ratios, still widely used as basic indicators of litter chemistry. Second, the potential of the solid state 13C-CPMAS NMR is reported as a powerful tool to assess the chemical composition of both litter and organic amendments. Finally, six different study cases are reported to provide evidence of the usefulness of such metabolomic approach for the description of organic matter chemistry aimed to an effective prediction of its impact on soil ecosystem functions.

Keywords

Soil microbiome Litter decomposition Soil structural stability Phytoxicity Disease suppression Soil water repellency Soil fungistasis 

References

  1. Abiven S, Menasseri S, Chenu C (2009) The effects of organic inputs over time on soil aggregate stability—a literature analysis. Soil Biol Biochem 41:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adair EC, Parton WJ, Del Grosso SJ et al (2008) Simple three-pool model accurately describes patterns of long-term litter decomposition in diverse climates. Glob Change Biol 14:2636–2660Google Scholar
  3. Aerts R (1997) Climate, leaf litter chemistry and leaf litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: a triangular relationship. Oikos 79:439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Agrios GN (2005) Plant pathology, 5th edn. Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
  5. Águas A, Incerti G, Saracino A et al (2017) Fire effects on litter chemistry and early development of Eucalyptus globulus. Plant Soil.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-017-3419-2 Google Scholar
  6. Almendros G, Knicker H, Gonzalez-Vila FJ (2003) Rearrangement of carbon and nitrogen forms in peat after progressive thermal oxidation as determined by solid-state 13 C and 15 N-NMR spectroscopy. Org Geochem 34:1559–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baldock JA, Oades JM, Nelson PN, Skene TM, Golchin A, Clarke P (1997) Assessing the extent of decomposition of natural organic materials using solid-state 13C NMR spectroscopy. Soil Res 35(5):1061–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bäumler AJ, Sperandio V (2016) Interactions between the microbiota and pathogenic bacteria in the gut. Nature 535:85–93PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berg B, Matzner E (1997) The effect of N deposition on the mineralization of C from plant litter and humus. Environ Rev 5:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berg B, McClaugherty C (2013) Plant litter: decomposition, humus formation and carbon sequestration, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. Biederbeck VO, Campbell CA, Rasiah V, Zentner RP, Wen G (1998) Soil quality attributes as influenced by annual legumes used as green manure. Soil Biol Biochem 30(8):1177–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blackwell PS (2000) Management of water repellency in Australia, and risks associated with preferential flow, pesticide concentration and leaching. J Hydrol 231:384–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boddy E, Hill PW, Farrar J, Jones DL (2007) Fast turnover of low molecular weight components of the dissolved organic carbon pool of temperate grassland field soils. Soil Biol Biochem 39(4):827–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boehm MJ, Wu T, Stone AG, Kraakman B, Iannotti DA (1997) Crosspolarized magic-angle spinning 13C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic characterization of soil organic matter relative to culturable bacterial species composition and sustained biological control of Pythium root rot. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:162–168PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonanomi G, Sicurezza MG, Caporaso S, Esposito A, Mazzoleni S (2006) Phytotoxicity dynamics of decaying plant materials. New Phytol 169:571–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bonanomi G, Antignani V, Pane C, Scala F (2007) Suppression of soilborne fungal diseases with organic amendments. J Plant Pathol 89:311–324Google Scholar
  17. Bonanomi G, Antignani V, Capodilupo M, Scala F (2010) Identifying the characteristics of organic soil amendments that suppress soilborne plant diseases. Soil Biol Biochem 42:136–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bonanomi G, Antignani V, Barile E, Lanzotti V, Scala F (2011a) Decomposition of Medicago sativa residues affects phytotoxicity, fungal growth and soil-borne pathogen diseases. J Plant Pathol 93:57–69Google Scholar
  19. Bonanomi G, Incerti G, Barile E, Capodilupo M, Antignani V et al (2011b) Phytotoxicity, not nitrogen immobilization, explains plant litter inhibitory effects: evidence from solid-state 13C NMR spectroscopy. New Phytol 191:1018–1030PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bonanomi G, Gaglione SA, Incerti G, Zoina A (2013a) Biochemical quality of organic amendments affects soil fungistasis. Appl Soil Ecol 72:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bonanomi G, Incerti G, Giannino F, Mingo A, Lanzotti V et al (2013b) Litter quality assessed by solid state 13C NMR spectroscopy predicts decay rate better than C/N and Lignin/N ratios. Soil Biol Biochem 56:40–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bonanomi G et al (2016a) Unimodal patter of soil hydrophobicity along an altitudinal gradient encompassing Mediterranean, temperate and alpine ecosystems. Plant Soil 409:37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bonanomi G, Ippolito F, Senatore M, Cesarano G, Incerti G, Saracino A, Lanzotti V, Scala F, Mazzoleni S (2016b) Water extracts of charred litter cause opposite effects on growth of plants and fungi. Soil Biol Biochem 92:133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Bonanomi G et al (2017a) Comparing chemistry and bioactivity of burned vs. decomposed plant litter: different pathways but same result? Ecology.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2053 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Bonanomi G, Cesarano G, Lombardi N, Motti R, Scala F et al (2017b) Litter chemistry explains contrasting feeding preferences of bacteria, fungi, and higher plants. Sci Rep 7:9208PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Bonanomi G, Gaglione SA, Cesarano G, Sarker TC, Pascale M et al (2017c) Frequent applications of organic matter to agricultural soil increase fungistasis. Pedosphere 27:86–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Bonanomi G, Ippolito F, Cesarano G, Vinale F, Lombardi N et al (2018) Biochar chemistry defined by 13C-CPMAS NMR explains opposite effects on soilborne microbes and crop plants. Appl Soil Ecol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.11.027 Google Scholar
  28. Bond WJ, Keeley JE (2005) Fire as a global ‘herbivore’: the ecology and evolution of flammable ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 20:387–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Börner H (1960) Liberation of organic substances from higher plants and their role in the soil sickness problem. Bot Rev 26:393–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Bradford MA, Berg B, Maynard DS, Wieder WR, Wood SA (2016) Understanding the dominant controls on litter decomposition. J Ecol 104:229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Burke IC, Kaye JP, Bird SP, Hall SA, McCulley RL, Sommerville GL (2003) Evaluating and testing models of terrestrial biogeochemistry: the role of temperature in controlling decomposition. In: Canham CD, Lauenroth WK (eds) Models in ecosystem science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 225–253Google Scholar
  32. Cesarano G, Incerti G, Bonanomi G (2016) The influence of plant litter on soil water repellency: insight from 13C NMR spectroscopy. PLoS ONE 11:e0152565PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Coleman K, Jenkinson DS (1996) RothC-26.3—a model for the turnover of carbon in soil. In: Powlson DS, Smith P, Smith JU (eds) Evaluation of soil organic matter models, using existing long-term datasets. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 237–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Cornelissen JHC, Thompson K (1997) Functional leaf attributes predict litter decomposition rate in herbaceous plants. New Phytol 135:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Cornwell WK, Cornelissen JH, Amatangelo K et al (2008) Plant species traits are the predominant control on litter decomposition rates within biomes worldwide. Ecol Lett 11(10):1065–1071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Davidson EA, Janssens IA (2006) Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature 440:165–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. DeBano L (2000) Water repellency in soils: a historical overview. J Hydrol 231(232):4–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dekker LW, Jungerius PD (1990) Water repellency in the dunes with special reference to the Netherlands. Catena Suppl 18:173–183Google Scholar
  39. Del Grosso SJ, Parton WJ, Mosier AR et al (2001) Simulated interaction of carbon dynamics and nitrogen trace gas fluxes using the DAYCENT model. In: Schaffer M, Ma L, Hansen S (eds) Modeling carbon and nitrogen dynamics for soil management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 303–332Google Scholar
  40. Diacono M, Montemurro F (2010) Long-term effects of organic amendments on soil fertility. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 30(2):401–422Google Scholar
  41. Dilly O, Bloem J, Vos A, Munch JC (2004) Bacterial diversity in agricultural soils during litter decomposition. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:468–474PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Dix NJ, Webster J (1995) Fungal ecology. Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0693-1 Google Scholar
  43. Doerr SH, Shakesby RA, Walsh RPD (2000) Soil water repellency: its causes, characteristics and hydro-geomorphological significance. Earth Sci Rev 51:33–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Elad Y, David DR, Harel YM et al (2010) Induction of systemic resistance in plants by biochar, a soil-applied carbon sequestering agent. Phytopathology 100:913–921PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Facelli JM, Pickett STA (1991) Plant litter: its dynamics and effects on plant community structure. Bot Rev 57:1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ferreira AJD, Coelho COA, Walsh RPD, Shakesby RA, Ceballos A, Doerr SH (2000) Hydrological implications of soil waterrepellency in Eucalyptus globulus forests, north-Central Portugal. J Hydrol 231:165–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Fogel R, Cromack K Jr (1977) Effect of habitat and substrate quality on Douglas fir litter decomposition in Western Oregon. Can J Bot 55:1632–1640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Frankland JC (1998) Fungal succession: unravelling the unpredictable. Mycol Res 102:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Franko U, Oelschlägel B, Schenk S (1995) Simulation of temperature, and nitrogen dynamics using the model CANDY. Ecol Model 81:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Galletti GC, Reeves JB, Bloomfield J, Vogt KA, Vogt DJ (1993) Analysis of leaf and fine root litter from a subtropical montane rain forest by pyrolysis—gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. J Anal Appl Pyrol 27(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gillon D, Joffre R, Ibrahima A (1994) Initial litter properties and decay rate: a microcosm experiment on Mediterranean species. Can J Bot 72:946–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gillon D, Joffre R, Ibrahima A (1999) Can litter decomposability be predicted by near infrared reflectance spectroscopy? Ecology 80:175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Goebel M, Hobbie SE, Bulaj B et al (2011) Decomposition of the finest root branching orders: linking belowground dynamics to fine-root function and structure. Ecol Monogr 81:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. González-Pelayo O, Gimeno-García E, Ferreira CSS et al (2015) Water repellency of air-dried and sieved samples from limestone soils in Central Portugal collected before and after prescribed fire. Plant Soil 394:199–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. González-Pérez JA, González-Vila FJ, Almendros G, Knicker H (2004) The effect of fire on soil organic matter—a review. Environ Int 30:855–870PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hardison JR (1976) Fire and flame for plant disease control. Annu Rev Phytopathol 14:355–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Harper JE, Webster J (1964) An experimental analysis of the coprophilous fungus succession. Trans Br Mycol Soc 47:511–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hättenschwiler S, Gasser P (2005) Soil animals alter plant litter diversity effects on decomposition. PNAS 102(5):1519–1524PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hättenschwiler S, Tiunov AV, Scheu S (2005) Biodiversity and litter decomposition interrestrial ecosystems. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:191–218Google Scholar
  60. Hättenschwiler S, Coq S, Barantal S, Tanya I (2011) Leaf traits and decomposition in tropical rainforests: revisiting some commonly held views and towards a new hypothesis. New Phytol 189:950–965PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hodge A, Robinson D, Fitter AH (2000) Are microorganisms more effective than plants at competing for nitrogen? Trends Plant Sci 5:304–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Hoitink HAJ, Boehm MJ (1999) Biocontrol within the context of soil microbial communities: a substrate-dependent phenomenon. Annu Rev Phytopathol 37:427–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Hoitink HAJ, Madden LV, Dorrance AE (2006) Systemic resistance induced by Trichoderma spp.: interactions between the host, the pathogen, the biocontrol agent, and soil organic matter quality. Phytopathology 96:186–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hudson HJ (1968) The ecology of fungi on plant remains above the soil. New Phytol 67:837–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Hunt ER Jr, Piper SC, Nemani R et al (1996) Global net carbon exchange and intra-annual atmospheric CO2 concentrations predicted by an ecosystem process model and three-dimensional atmospheric transport model. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 10:431–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Inbar Y, Chen Y, Hadar Y (1989) Solid-state carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance and infrared spectroscopy of composted organic matter. Soil Sci Soc Am J 53:1695–1701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Incerti G, Bonanomi G, Giannino F et al (2011) Litter decomposition in Mediterranean ecosystems: modelling the controlling role of climatic conditions and litter quality. Appl Soil Ecol 49:148–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Incerti G, Capodilupo M, Senatore M et al (2013) Biochemical changes assessed by 13C-CPMAS NMR spectroscopy control fungal growth on water extracts of decaying plant litter. Mycoscience 54:449–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Incerti G, Bonanomi G, Giannino F, Cartenì F, Spaccini R et al (2017) OMDY: a new model of organic matter decomposition based on biomolecular content as assessed by 13C-CPMAS-NMR. Plant Soil 411:377–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Jaramillo DF, Dekker LW, Ritsema CJ, Hendrickx JMH (2000) Occurrence of soil water repellency in arid and humid climates. J Hydrol 231:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Kajiura M, Tokida T, Seki K (2012) Effects of moisture conditions on potential soil water repellency in a tropical forest regenerated after fire. Geoderma 181:30–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Knicker H (2007) How does fire affect the nature and stability of soil organic nitrogen and carbon? A review. Biogeochemistry 85:91–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Kögel-Knabner I (2002) The macromolecular organic composition of plant and microbial residues as inputs to soil organic matter. Soil Biol Biochem 34:139–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Koorem K, Price JN, Moora M (2011) Species-specific effects of woody litter on seedling emergence and growth of herbaceous plants. PLoS One 6:e26505PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Lehmann J, Joseph S (2015) Biochar for environmental management: science, technology and implementation, 2nd edn. Routledge, OxonGoogle Scholar
  76. Lehmann J, Kleber M (2015) The contentious nature of soil organic matter. Nature 528:60–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Li C, Zhuang Y, Frolking S et al (2003) Modeling soil organic carbon change in croplands of China. Ecol Appl 13:327–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Liski J, Nissinen A, Erhard M, Taskinen O (2003) Climatic effect on litter decomposition from arctic tundra to tropical rainforest. Glob Change Biol 9:575–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Liski J, Palosuo T, Peltoniemi M, Sievänen R (2005) Carbon and decomposition model Yasso for forest soils. Ecol Model 189:168–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Lockwood JL (1977) Fungistasis in soils. Biol Rev 52:1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Lopez-Iglesias B, Olmo M, Gallardo A, Villar R (2014) Short-term effects of litter from 21 woody species on plant growth and root development. Plant Soil 381:177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Loydi A, Eckstein RL, Otte A, Donath TW (2013) Effects of litter on seedling establishment in natural and semi-natural grasslands: a meta-analysis. J Ecol 101:454–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Majdi H, Pregitzer K, Moren AS, Nylund JE, Ågren GI (2005) Measuring fine root turnover in forest ecosystems. Plant Soil 276(1–2):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Martens DA, Frankenberger WT (1992) Modification of infiltration rates in an organic-amended irrigated. Agron J 84:707–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Martin FN (2003) Development of alternative strategies for management of soilborne pathogens currently controlled with methyl bromide. Annu Rev Phytopathol 41:325–350PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Mataix-Solera J, Cerdà A, Arcenegui V, Jordàn A, Zavala LM (2011) Fire effects on soil aggregation: a review. Earth Sci Rev 109:44–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Mathers NJ, Jalota RK, Dalal RC, Boyd SE (2007) 13C-NMR analysis of decomposing litter and fine roots in the semi-arid Mulga Lands of southern Queensland. Soil Biol Biochem 39:993–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Mazzoleni S, Bonanomi G, Incerti G et al (2015) Inhibitory and toxic effects of extracellular self-DNA in litter: a mechanism for negative plant–soil feedbacks? New Phytol 205:1195–1210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Meentemeyer V (1978) Macroclimate and lignin control of litter decomposition rates. Ecology 59:465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Meiners SJ (2014) Functional correlates of allelopathic potential in a successional plant community. Plant Ecol 215:661–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Melillo JM, Aber JD, Muratore JF (1982) Nitrogen and lignin control of hardwood leaf litter decomposition dynamics. Ecology 63:621–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Merritt RW, Lawson DL (1992) The role of leaf litter macroinvertebrates in stream-floodplain dynamics. Hydrobiologia 248:65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Monnier G (1965) Action des matiéres organiques sur la stabilité structurale des sols. The` se de la faculté des sciences de Paris, p 140Google Scholar
  94. Morales VL, Parlange J-Y, Steenhuis TS (2010) Are preferential flow paths perpetuated by microbial activity in the soil matrix? A review. J Hydrol 393:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Nebbioso A, Piccolo A (2011) Basis of a Humeomics Science: chemical fractionation and molecular characterization of humic biosuprastructures. Biomacromol 12:1187–1199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Nebbioso A, Vinci G, Drosos M, Spaccini R, Piccolo A (2015) Unveiling the molecular composition of the unextractable soil organic fraction (humin) by humeomics. Biol Fertil Soils 51:443–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Newell K (1984) Interaction between two decomposer basidiomycetes and a collembolan under Sitka spruce: distribution, abundance and selective grazing. Soil Biol Biochem 16:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Ono K, Hiradate S, Morita S, Ohse K, Hirai K (2011) Humification processes of needle litters on forest floors in Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) and Hinoki cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa) plantations in Japan. Plant Soil 338:171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Osono T, Takeda H (2001) Organic chemical and nutrient dynamics in decomposing beech leaf litter in relation to fungal ingrowth and succession during 3-year decomposition processes in a cool temperate deciduous forest in Japan. Ecol Res 16:649–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Pane C, Spaccini R, Piccolo A, Scala F, Bonanomi G (2011) Compost amendments enhance peat suppressiveness to Pythium ultimum, Rhizoctonia solani and Sclerotinia minor. Biol Control 56:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Pane C, Piccolo A, Spaccini R, Celano G, Villecco D, Zaccardelli M (2013) Agricultural waste-based composts exhibiting suppressivity to diseases caused by the phytopathogenic soil-borne fungi Rhizoctonia solani and Sclerotinia minor. Appl Soil Ecol 65:43–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Parton WJ, Ojima DS, Cole CV, Schimel DS (1994) A general model for soil organic matter dynamics: sensitivity to litter chemistry, texture, and management. Quant Model Soil Form Process 39:147–167Google Scholar
  103. Pastor J, Post WM (1986) Influence of climate, soil moisture, and succession on forest carbon and nitrogen cycles. Biogeochemistry 2:3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Pausas JG, Vallejo VR (1999) The role of fire in European Mediterranean ecosystems. In: Chuvieco E (ed) Remote sensing of large wildfires. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Piccolo A (2002) The supramolecular structure of humic substances. A novel understanding of humus chemistry and implications in soil Science. Adv Agron 75:57–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Piccolo A, Conte P, Spaccini R, Mbagwu JSC (2005) Influence of land use on the characteristics of humic substances in some tropical soils of Nigeria. Eur J Soil Sci 56:343–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Prescott CE (2010) Litter decomposition: what controls it and how can we alter it to sequester more carbon in forest soils? Biogeochemistry 101:133–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Preston CM, Nault JR, Trofymow JA (2009) 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 12:1078–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Putnam AR (1994) Phytotoxicity of plant residues. Managing agricultural residues. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 285–314Google Scholar
  110. Reich PB, Tjoelker MG, Pregitzer KS et al (2008) Scaling of respiration to nitrogen in leaves, stems and roots of higher land plants. Ecol Lett 11(8):793–801PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Rice EL (1984) Allelopathy, 2nd edn. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  112. Rinkes ZL, Weintraub MN, DeForest JL, Moorhead DL (2011) Microbial substrate preference and community dynamics during decomposition of Acer saccharum. Fungal Ecol 4:396–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Robichaud PR, Hungerford RD (2000) Water repellency by laboratory burning of four northern Rocky Mountain forest soils. J Hydrol 231:207–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Roper MM, Ward PR, Keulen AF, Hill JR (2013) Under no-tillage and stubble retention, soil water content and crop growth are poorly related to soil water repellency. Soil Tillage Res 126:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Rovira P, Rovira R (2010) Fitting litter decomposition datasets to mathematical curves: towards a generalised exponential approach. Geoderma 155:329–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Rovira P, Vallejo VR (2007) Labile, recalcitrant, and inert organic matter in Mediterranean forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem 39:202–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Running SW, Gower ST (1991) Forest-BGC, a general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications. II. Dynamic carbon allocation and nitrogen budgets. Tree Physiol 9:147–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Russell EJ, Petherbridge FR (1912) Investigations on “Sickness” in soil: II. “Sickness” in Glasshouse soils. J Agric Sci 5:86–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Sarker TS, Incerti G, Spaccini R et al (2018) Linking organic matter chemistry with soil aggregate stability: insight from 13C NMR spectroscopy. Soil Biol Biochem 117:175–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Schaumann GE, Braun B, Kirchner D et al (2007) Influence of biofilms on the water repellency of urban soil samples. Hydrol Process 21:2276–2284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Schreiner O, Sullivan MX (1908) Soil fatigue caused by organic compounds. J Biol Chem 6:39–50Google Scholar
  122. Shakesby RA, Doerr SH, Walsh RPD (2000) The erosional impact of soil hydrophobicity: current problems and future research directions. J Hydrol 231:178–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Shibu ME, Leffelaar PA, Van Keulen H, Aggarwal PK (2006) Quantitative description of soil organic matter dynamics - a review of approaches with reference to rice-based cropping systems. Geoderma 137:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Sirois L (1993) Impact of fire on Picea mariana and Pinus banksiana seedlings in subarctic lichen woodlands. J Veg Sci 4:795–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Sitch S, Smith B, Prentice IC et al (2003) Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model. Glob Change Biol 9:161–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Smith P, Smith JU, Powlson DS et al (1997) A comparison of the performance of nine soil organic matter models using datasets from seven long-term experiments. Geoderma 81:153–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Sonnleitner R, Lorbeer E, Schinner F (2003) Effects of straw, vegetable oil and whey on physical and microbiological properties of a chernozem. Appl Soil Ecol 22:195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Spaccini R, Piccolo A (2007) Molecular characterization of compost at increasing stages of maturity. 2. Thermochemolysis−GC-MS and 13C-CPMAS-NMR spectroscopy. J Agric Food Chem 55:2303–2311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Spaccini R, Mbagwu JSC, Conte P, Piccolo A (2006) Changes of humic substances characteristics from forested to cultivated soils in Ethiopia. Geoderma 132:9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Stinca A, Chirico GB, Incerti G, Bonanomi G (2015) Regime shift by an exotic nitrogen-fixing shrub mediates plant facilitation in primary succession. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123128 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  131. Stone AG, Traina SJ, Hoitink HAJ (2001) Particulate organic matter composition and Pythium damping-off of cucumber. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:761–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Swift MJ, Heal OW, Anderson JM (1979) Decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  133. Taylor BR, Parkinson D, Parsons WFJ (1989) Nitrogen and lignin content as predictors of litter decay rates: a microcosm test. Ecology 70:97–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Tenuta M, Lazarovits G (2004) Soil properties associated with the variable effectiveness of meat and bone meal to kill microsclerotia of Verticillium dahliae. Appl Soil Ecol 25:219–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Termorshuizen AJ, van Rijn E, van der Gaag DJ et al (2007) Suppressiveness of 18 composts against 7 pathosystems: variability in pathogen response. Soil Biol Biochem 38:2461–2477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Tian G, Brussaard L, Kang BT (1995) An index for assessing the quality of plant residues and evaluating their effects on soil and crop in the (sub-) humid tropics. Appl Soil Ecol 2:25–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Tilston EL, Pitt D, Groenhof AC (2002) Composted recycled organic matter suppresses soil-borne diseases of field crops. New Phytol 154:731–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Tiquia SM (2010) Reduction of compost phytotoxicity during the process of decomposition. Chemosphere 79:506–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Van-Camp L, Bujarrabal B, Gentile AR et al (2004) Reports of the technical working groups established under the thematic strategy for soil protection. EUR 21319 EN/3. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  140. Voříšková J, Baldrian P (2013) Fungal community on decomposing leaf litter undergoes rapid successional changes. ISME J 7:477–486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Wallenstein MD, Hess AM, Lewis MR, Steltzer H, Ayres E (2010) Decomposition of aspen leaf litter results in unique metabolomes when decomposed under different tree species. Soil Biol Biochem 42:484–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Wedin D, Tilman D (1993) Competition among grasses along a nitrogen gradient: initial conditions and mechanisms of competition. Ecol Monogr 63:199–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Wine ML, Ochsner TE, Sutradhar A, Pepin R (2012) Effects of eastern redcedar encroachment on soil hydraulic properties along Oklahoma’s grassland-forest ecotone. Hydrol Process 26:1720–1728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Xiong S, Nilsson C (1999) The effects of plant litter on vegetation: a meta-analysis. J Ecol 87:984–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Yang H, Liu L, Li X et al (2014) Water repellency of biological soil crusts and influencing factors on the southeast fringe of the Tengger Desert, north-Central China. Soil Sci 179:424–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Zak DR, Holmes WE, White DC, Peacock AD, Tilman D (2003) Plant diversity, soil microbial communities, and ecosystem function: are there any links? Ecology 84(8):2042–2050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Zavala LM, González FA, Jordán A (2009) Intensity and persistence of water repellency in relation to vegetation types and soil parameters in Mediterranean SW Spain. Geoderma 152:361–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabrizio Cartenì
    • 1
  • Tushar C. Sarker
    • 1
  • Giuliano Bonanomi
    • 1
  • Gaspare Cesarano
    • 1
  • Alfonso Esposito
    • 2
  • Guido Incerti
    • 3
  • Stefano Mazzoleni
    • 1
  • Virginia Lanzotti
    • 1
  • Francesco Giannino
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural SciencesUniversity of Naples Federico IIPorticiItaly
  2. 2.Centre for Integrative BiologyUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Di4A, Department of Agri-Food, Animal and Environmental SciencesUniversity of UdineUdineItaly

Personalised recommendations