Plant and Soil

, Volume 333, Issue 1–2, pp 275–285 | Cite as

Does light exposure make plant litter more degradable?

  • Bente Foereid
  • Jessica Bellarby
  • Wolfram Meier-Augenstein
  • Helen Kemp
Regular Article

Abstract

Many field experiments have indicated that litter decomposition in semi-arid areas may be partly or fully controlled by photodegradation. We devised a study to test our hypothesis that light exposure makes plant litter more degradable. Dry, senescent, aboveground plant litter from Miscanthus x giganteus was exposed to light including ultraviolet (UV) radiation for various lengths of time from 0 to 289 days. Weight loss was measured after exposure and appeared to be modest and did not increase with time of exposure. The litter of the longest and shortest exposure time as well as controls were then incubated with soil and moisture for 35 days and CO2 and N2O production were measured. The longest exposed litter degraded much faster than any other treatment during incubation with moisture, about twice as fast as the unexposed control. The shortest exposed however, degraded only slightly faster than the unexposed control. This suggests that increasing litter degradability is a more important mechanism for photodegradation than direct light-induced mass loss. N2O production from decomposition of the exposed litter was high in the beginning, suggesting that nitrogen may be released quickly. The mechanism is probably that light exposure leaves the nitrogen in plant litter easily available to microbial utilisation upon wetting. Such a mechanism might play an important role for nutrient cycling in semi-arid areas.

Keywords

Photodegradation Decomposition Nitrous oxide 13

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Dr. John Clifton-Brown at IGER, UK for supplying the Miscanthus plant material, and Dr. David Burslem at Aberdeen University for supplying soils from a tropical environment. Professor David Robinson at Aberdeen University is acknowledged for helping with light spectrum measurements. This study was funded by the University of Aberdeen. Professor Pete Smith at Aberdeen University is acknowledged for helping to obtain funding.

References

  1. Allen S (1989) Chemical analysis of ecological materials. Wiley, Blackwell, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Anesio AM, Tranvik LJ, Graneli W (1999) Production of inorganic carbon from aquatic macrophytes by solar radiation. Ecology 80:1852–1859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin AT, Vivanco L (2006) Plant litter decomposition in a semi-arid ecosystem controlled by photodegradation. Nature 442:555–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernoux M, Cerri CC, Neill C, de Moraes JFL (1998) The use of stable carbon isotopes for estimating soil organic matter turnover rates. Gendarme 82:43–58Google Scholar
  5. Bertilsson S, Tranvik LJ (2000) Photochemical transformation of dissolved organic matter in lakes. Limnol Oceanogr 45:753–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brandt LA, King JY, Milchunas DG (2007) Effects of ultraviolet radiation on litter decomposition depend on precipitation and litter chemistry in a shortgrass steppe ecosystem. Global Change Biol 13:2193–2205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brandt LA, Bohnet C, King KY (2009) Photochemically induced carbon dioxide production as a mechanism for carbon as a mechanism for carbon loss from plant litter in arid ecosystems. J Geophys Res 114:G02004. doi:10.1029/2008JG000772 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cadish G, Giller KE (1997) Driven by nature: plant litter quality and decomposition. CAB International, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Carre M, Bentaleb I, Blamart D, Ogle N, Cardenas F, Zevallos S, Kalin RM, Ortlieb L, Fontugne M (2005) Stable isotopes and sclerochronology of the bivalve Mesodesma donacium: potential application to Peruvian paleoceanographic reconstructions. Palaeogeography, Plaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 228:4–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Couteaux M-M, Bottner P, Berg B (1995) Litter decomposition, climate and litter quality. Trend Ecol Evol 10:63–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cox PM, Betts RA, Jones CD, Spall SA, Totterdell IJ (2000) Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model. Nature 408:184–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Craig H (1957) Isotopic standards for carbon and oxygen and correction factors for mass-spectrometric analysis of carbon dioxide. Geochim Cosmochim Act 12:133–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davidson RS (1996) The photodegradation of some naturally occurring polymers. J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem 33:3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Day TA, Zhang ET, Ruhland CT (2007) Exposure to UV-B radiation accelerates mass and lignin loss of Larrea tridentata litter in the Sonoran Desert. Plant Ecol. doi:10.1007/s11258-006-9257-6 Google Scholar
  15. Dent DH, Bagchi R, Robinson D, Majalap-Lee N, Burslem DFRP (2006) Nutrient fluxes via litterfall and leaf litter decomposition vary across a gradient of soil nutrient supply in a lowland tropical rain forest. Plant Soil 288:197–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El-ghali MAK, Tajori KG, Mansurbeg H, Ogle N, Kalin RM (2006) Origin and timing of siderite cementation in Upper Ordovician glaciogenic sandstones from the Murzuq basin, SW Libya. Marine Petrol Geol 23:459–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foereid B, De Neergaard A, Høgh-Jensen H (2004) Turnover of organic matter in a Miscanthus field: effect of time in Miscanthus cultivation and inorganic nitrogen supply. Soil Biol Biochem 36:1075–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fontaine S, Mariotti A, Abbadie L (2003) The priming effect of organic matter: a question of microbial competition? Soil Biol Biochem 35:837–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fontaine S, Bardoux G, Abbadie L, Mariotti A (2004) Carbon input to soil may decrease soil carbon content. Ecol Letters 7:314–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fontaine S, Barot S, Barre P, Bdioui N, Mary B, Rumpel C (2007) Stability of organic carbon in deep soil layers controlled by fresh carbon supply. Nature 450:277–280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Friedlingstein P, Cox P, Betts R, Bopp L, von Bloh W, Brovkin V, Cadule P, Doney S, Eby M, Fung I, Bala G, John J, Jones C, Joos F, Kato T, Kawamiya M, Knorr W, Lindsay K, Matthews HD, Raddatz T, Rayner P, Reick C, Roeckner E, Schnitzler KG, Schnur R, Strassmann K, Weaver AJ, Yoshikawa C, Zeng N (2006) Climate-carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4MIP model intercomparison. J Climate 19:3337–3353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fu S, Cheng W (2002) Rhizosphere priming effects on the decomposition of soil organic matter in C4 and C3 grassland soils. Plant Soil 238:289–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gallo ME, Sinsabaugh RL, Cabaniss SE (2006) The role of ultraviolet radiation in litter decomposition in arid ecosystems. Appl Soil Ecol 34:82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gallo ME, Porras-alfaro A, Odenbach KJ, Sinsabaugh RL (2009) Photoaccelartation of plant litter decomposition in an arid environment. Soil Biol Biochem 41:1433–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Henry HAL, Brizgys P, Field CB (2008) Litter decomposition in California annual grassland: interactions between photodegradation and litter layer thickness. Ecosystems 11:545–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hopkins DW, Sparrow AD, Gregorich EG, Elberling P, Novis F, Fraser C, Dennis PG, Meier-Augenstein W, Greenfield LG (2009) Isotopic evidence for the provenance and turnover of organic carbon by soil microorganisms in the Antarctic dry valleys. Environ Microbiol 11:597–608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hughes KA, Lawley B, Newsham KK (2003) Solar UV-B radation inhibits the growth of antarctic terrestrial fungi. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:1488–1491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuzyakov Y, Friedel KJ, Stahr K (2000) Review of mechanisms and quantification of priming effects. Soil Biol Biochem 32:1485–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lewandowski I, Clifton BJC, Scurlock JMO, Huisman W (2000) Miscanthus: European experience with a novel energy crop. Biomass Bioenergy 19:209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mans C, Denvard T, Tranvik LJ (1998) Effect of solar radiation on aquatic macrophyte litter decomposition. Oikos 82:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mayer ML, Schick LL, Hardy KR, Estapa ML (2009) Photodissolution and other photochemical changes upon irradiation of algal detritus. Limnol Oceanogr 54:1688–1698Google Scholar
  32. Moorhead DL, Callaghan T (1994) Effects of increasing ultraviolet-B radiation on decomposition and soil organic-matter dynamics—a synthesis and modeling study. Biol Fertil Soils 18:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pancotto VA, Sala OE, Robson TM, Caldwell MM, Scopel AL (2005) Direct and indirect effects of solar ultraviolet-B radiation on long-term decomposition. Global Change Biol 11:1982–1989Google Scholar
  34. Parton W, Silver WL, Burke IC, Grassens L, Harmon ME, Currie WS, King JY, Adair EC, Brandt LA, Hart SC, Fasth B (2007) Global-scale similarities in nitrogen release patterns during long-term decomposition. Science 315:361–364CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  36. Rey A, Petsikos C, Jarvis PG, Grace J (2005) Effect of temperature and moisture on rates of carbon mineralization in a Mediterranean oak forest soil under controlled and field conditions. Europ J Soil Sci 56:589–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reynolds JF (2001) Desertification. In: Levin S (ed) Encyclopedia of biodiversity. Academic, San Diego, pp 61–78Google Scholar
  38. Sitaula BK, Bakken LR, Abrahamsen G (1995) N-fertilization and soil acidification effects on N2O and CO2 emission from temperate pine forest soil. Soil Biol Biochem 27:1401–1408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Throop HL, Archer S (2007) Interrelationships among shrub encroachment, land management, litter decomposition in a semidesert grassland. Ecol Appl 17:1809–1823CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Tian G, Badejo M, Okoh A, Ishida F, Kolawole G, Hayashi Y, Salako F (2007) Effects of residue quality and climate on plant residue decomposition and nutrient release along the transect from humid forest to Sahel of West Africa. Biogeochemistry 86:217–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tranvik LJ, Bertilsson S (2001) Contrasting effects of solar UV radiation on dissolved organic sources for bacterial growth. Ecol Lett 4:458–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vanderbilt KL, White CS, Hopkins O, Craig JA (2008) Aboveground decomposition in arid environments: results of a long-term study in central New Mexico. J Arid Environ 72:696–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ververis C, Georghiou K, Christodulakis N, Santas P, Santas R (2004) Fiber dimension, lignin and cellulose content of various plant materials and their suitability for paper production. Indust Crop Product 19:245–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bente Foereid
    • 1
    • 4
  • Jessica Bellarby
    • 1
  • Wolfram Meier-Augenstein
    • 2
    • 3
  • Helen Kemp
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Biological and Environmental SciencesUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Scottish Crop Research Institute, InvergowrieDundeeUK
  3. 3.Centre for Anatomy & Human IdentificationUniversity of DundeeDundeeUK
  4. 4.Department of Crop and Soil SciencesCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations