Plant and Soil

, Volume 400, Issue 1–2, pp 403–416 | Cite as

Stoichiometric response of shrubs and mosses to long-term nutrient (N, P and K) addition in an ombrotrophic peatland

  • Meng WangEmail author
  • Tuula Larmola
  • Meaghan T. Murphy
  • Tim R. Moore
  • Jill L. Bubier
Regular Article


Background and aim

Although ombrotrophic peatlands are nutrient deficient, it is not clear to what extent plants will respond to changes in nutrient availability.


We examined the changes in foliar stoichiometry and species abundance of four shrub species and moss after a decade of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) fertilization at the Mer Bleue bog, eastern Canada.


Shrub abundance increased and moss cover decreased after fertilization with 6.4, 5 and 6.3 g m−2 yr−1 of N, P and K, respectively; foliar concentrations of N, P, K and calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) were affected. Stoichiometry showed mainly N limitation after P and K fertilization and P (co)limitation after high levels of N addition in shrubs; moss showed consistent K or KN-co-limitation, even with PK and NPK additions. Shrubs exhibited the strongest homeostasis (the maintenance of an organism’s tissue chemical composition with changes in environmental resources) to N, with the homeostatic regulation coefficient (H) > 9.7, compared to 1.4 in moss. For P and K, shrubs showed weaker homeostasis than N, while moss had a stronger homeostasis.


The strong homeostasis of shrubs may be an adaptive strategy to limited availability of soil N and P.


Stoichiometry Homeostasis Chamaedaphne calyculata Sphagnum moss Kalmia angustifolia Rhododendron groenlandicum Vaccinium myrtilloides 



We gratefully acknowledge the laboratory assistance of Hicham Benslim, Leanne Elchyshyn, Kellie Foster, Hélène Lalande, Sheng-Ting Lin and Cheenar Shah, and the field assistance of Corinne Magnusson, Mike Dalva and Vi Bui. MW was awarded a Ph.D. fellowship by the Chinese Scholarship Council and this research was funded by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discovery Grant to TRM and a National Science Foundation grant (DEB 1019523) to JLB. Additional funding was received from the Academy of Finland (Projects 286731, 293365 to TL) and the Start-up Funds (Z109021502) of Northwest A&F University to MW. We thank the National Capital Commission for access to Mer Bleue.

Supplementary material

11104_2015_2744_MOESM1_ESM.doc (38 kb)
Supplementary Figure S1 (DOC 38 kb)
11104_2015_2744_MOESM2_ESM.doc (322 kb)
Supplementary Figure S2 (DOC 321 kb)
11104_2015_2744_MOESM3_ESM.doc (32 kb)
Supplementary Table S1 (DOC 32 kb)
11104_2015_2744_MOESM4_ESM.doc (52 kb)
Supplementary Table S2 (DOC 52 kb)


  1. Aerts R, Wallén B, Malmer N (1992) Growth-limiting nutrients in Sphagnum-dominated bogs subject to low and high atmospheric nitrogen supply. J Ecol 80:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldous AR (2002) Nitrogen translocation in Sphagnum mosses: effects of atmospheric nitrogen deposition. New Phytol 156:241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berendse F, Van Breemen N, Rydin H, Buttler A, Heijmans M, Hoosbeek MR, Lee JA, Mitchell E, Saarinen T, Vasander H, Wallén B (2001) Raised atmospheric CO2 levels and increased N deposition cause shifts in plant species composition and production in Sphagnum bogs. Glob Chang Biol 7:591–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bragazza L, Limpens J, Gerdol R, Grosvernier P, Hájek M, Hájek T, Hajkova P, Hansen I, Iacumin P, Kutnar L, Rydin H, Tahvanainen T (2005) Nitrogen concentration and δ15N signature of ombrotrophic Sphagnum mosses at different N deposition levels in Europe. Glob Chang Biol 11:106–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bragazza L, Parisod J, Buttler A, Bardgett RD (2013) Biogeochemical plant-soil microbe feedback in response to climate warming in peatlands. Nat Clim Chang 3:273–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bragazza L, Tahvanainen T, Kutnar L, Rydin H, Limpens J, Hájek M, Grosvernier P, Hájek T, Hajkova P, Hansen I, Iacumin P, Gerdol R (2004) Nutritional constraints in ombrotrophic Sphagnum plants under increasing atmospheric nitrogen deposition in Europe. New Phytol 163: 609–616Google Scholar
  7. Bubier JL, Moore TR, Bledzki LA (2007) Effects of nutrient addition on vegetation and carbon cycling in an ombrotrophic bog. Glob Chang Biol 13:1168–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bubier JL, Smith R, Juutinen S, Moore TR, Minocha R, Long S, Minocha S (2011) Effects of nutrient addition on leaf chemistry morphology and photosynthetic capacity of three bog shrubs. Oecologia 167:355–368CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Buttler A (1992) Permanent plot research in wet meadows and cutting experiment. Vegetatio 103:113–124Google Scholar
  10. Canadian Climate Normals (1981–2010) National climate data and information archive. Accessed 04 May 2015
  11. Charman D (2002) Peatlands and environmental change. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  12. Chong M, Humphreys E, Moore TR (2012) Microclimatic response to increasing shrub cover and its effect on Sphangum CO2 exchange in a bog. Ecoscience 19:89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Granath G, Strengbom J, Breeuwer A, Heijmans MMPD, Berendse F, Rydin H (2009) Photosynthetic performance in Sphagnum transplanted along a latitudinal nitrogen deposition gradient. Oecologia 159:705–715CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hangs RD, Greer KJ, Sulewski CA (2004) The effect of interspecific competition on conifer seedling growth and nitrogen availability measured using ion-exchange membranes. Can J For Res 34:754–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heijmans MMPD, Berendse F, Arp WJ, Masselink AK, Klees H, de Visser W, van Breemen N (2001) Effects of elevated carbon dioxide and increased nitrogen deposition on bog vegetation in the Netherlands. J Ecol 89:268–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heijmans MMPD, Klees H, Berendse F (2002) Competition between Sphagnum magellanicum and Eriophorum angustifolium as affected by raised CO2 and increased N deposition. Oikos 97:415–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoosbeek MR, Van Breemen N, Vasander H, Buttler A, Berendse F (2002) Potassium limits potential growth of bog vegetation under elevated atmospheric CO2 and N deposition. Glob Chang Biol 8:1130–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jiroušek M, Hájek M, Bragazza L (2011) Nutrient stoichiometry in Sphagnum along a nitrogen deposition gradient in highly polluted region of Central-East Europe. Environ Pollut 159:585–590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Juutinen S, Bubier JL, Moore TR (2010) Responses of vegetation and ecosystem CO2 exchange to 9 years of nutrient addition at Mer Bleue bog. Ecosystems 13:874–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM (1996) The vegetation N:P ratio: a new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. J Appl Ecol 33:1441–1450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kooijman SALM (1995) The stoichiometry of animal energetics. J Theor Biol 177:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lamers LPM, Bobbink R, Roelofs JGM (2000) Natural nitrogen filter fails in polluted raised bogs. Glob Chang Biol 6:583–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Larmola T, Bubier JL, Kobyljanec C, Basiliko N, Juutinen S, Humphreys E, Preston M, Moore TR (2013) Vegetation feedbacks of nutrient addition lead to a weaker carbon sink in an ombrotrophic bog. Glob Chang Biol 19:3729–3739CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Larmola T, Leppänen SM, Tuittila E-S, Aarva M, Merilä P, Fritze H, Tiirola M (2014) Methanotrophy induces nitrogen fixation during peatland development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:734–739PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Limpens J, Berendse F (2003) Growth reduction of Sphagnum magellanicum subjected to high nitrogen deposition: the role of amino acid nitrogen concentration. Oecologia 135:339–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Limpens J, Berendse F, Klees H (2003) N deposition affects N availability in interstitial water growth of Sphagnum and invasion of vascular plants in bog vegetation. New Phytol 157:339–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loisel J, Yu ZC, Beilman DW, Camill P, Alm J, Amesbury MJ, Anderson D, Andersson S, Bochicchio C, Barber K, Belyea LR, Bunbury J, Chambers FM, Charman DJ, De Vleeschouwer F, Fialkiewicz-Koziel B, Finkelstein SA, Galka M, Garneau M, Hammarlund D, Hinchcliffe W, Holmquist J, Hughes P, Jones MC, Klein ES, Kokfelt U, Korhola A, Kuhry P, Lamarre A, Lamentowicz M, Large D, Lavoie M, MacDonald G, Magnan G, Makila M, Mallon G, Mathijssen P, Mauquoy D, McCarroll J, Moore TR, Nichols J, O’Reilly B, Oksanen P, Packalen M, Peteet D, Richard PJH, Robinson S, Ronkainen T, Rundgren M, Sannel ANK, Tarnocai C, Thom T, Tuittila ES, Turetsky M, Valiranta M, van der Linden M, van Geel B, van Bellen S, Vitt D, Zhao Y, Zhou WJ (2014) A database and synthesis of northern peatland soil properties and Holocene carbon and nitrogen accumulation. The Holocene 24:1028–1042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mahowald N, Jickells TD, Baker AR, Artaxo P, Benitez-Nelson CR, Bergametti G, Bond TC, Chen Y, Cohen DD, Herut B, Kubilay N, Losno R, Luo C, Maenhaut W, McGee KA, Okin GS, Siefert RL, Tsukuda S (2008) Global distribution of atmospheric phosphorus sources concentrations and deposition rates and anthropogenic impacts. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 22, GB4026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Makino W, Cotner JB, Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2003) Are bacteria more like plants or animals? Growth rate and resource dependence of bacterial C:N:P stoichiometry. Funct Ecol 17:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Malmer N, Horton DG, Vitt DH (1992) Element concentrations in mosses and surface waters of western Canadian mires relative to precipitation chemistry and hydrology. Ecography 15:114–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Murphy J, Riley JP (1962) A modified single solution method for determination of phosphate in natural waters. Anal Chim Acta 26:31–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Murphy MT, McKinley A, Moore TR (2009) Variations in above- and below-ground vascular plant biomass and water table on a temperate ombrotrophic peatland. Botany 87:845–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Newman EI (1995) Phosphorus inputs to terrestrial ecosystems. J Ecol 83:713–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Olde Venterink H, Wassen MJ, Verkroost AWM, de Ruiter PC (2003) Species richness-productivity patterns differ between N- P- and K-limited wetlands. Ecology 84:2191–2199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pakarinen P, Gorham E (1983) Mineral element composition of Sphagnum fuscum peats collected from Minnesota, Mannitoba and Ontario. In: Spigarelli S (ed) Proceedings of the international peat symposium. Bemidji State University, Bemidji, pp 471–479Google Scholar
  36. Pakarinen P, Tolonen K (1977) Nutrient contents of Sphagnum mosses in relation to bog water chemistry in northern Finland. Lindbergia 4:27–33Google Scholar
  37. Parkinson JA, Allen SE (1975) Wet oxidation procedure suitable for determination of nitrogen and mineral nutrients in biological material. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 6:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Persson J, Fink P, Goto A, Hood JM, Jonas J, Kato S (2010) To be or not to be what you eat: regulation of stoichiometric homeostasis among autotrophs and heterotrophs. Oikos 119:741–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rydin H, Clymo RS (1989) Transport of carbon and phosphorus compounds about Sphagnum. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 237:63–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rydin H, Jeglum JK (2006) The biology of peatlands. Oxford University Press, New York CityCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schindler DW, Newbury RW, Beaty KG, Campbell P (1976) Natural water and chemical budgets for a small Precambrian lake basin in Central Canada. J Fish Res Bd Can 33:2526–2543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2002) Ecological stoichiometry: the biology of elements from molecules to the biosphere. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  43. Tarnocai C (2006) The effect of climate change on carbon in Canadian peatlands. Glob Planet Chang 53:222–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thormann MN, Bayley SE (1997) Aboveground plant production and nutrient content of the vegetation in six peatlands in Alberta Canada. Plant Ecol 131:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tipping E, Benham S, Boyle JF, Crow P, Davies J, Fischer U, Guyatt H, Helliwell R, Jackson-Blake L, Lawlor AJ, Monteith DT, Rowe EC, Toberman H (2014) Atmospheric deposition of phosphorus to land and freshwater. Environ Sci Process Impacts 16:1608–1617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Tomassen HBM, Smolders AJP, Lamers LPM, Roelofs JGM (2003) Stimulated growth of Betula pubescens and Molinia caerulea on ombrotrophic bogs: role of high levels of atmospheric nitrogen deposition. J Ecol 91:357–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Turunen J, Roulet N, Moore TR, Richard PJH (2004) Nitrogen deposition and increased carbon accumulation in ombrotrophic peatlands in eastern Canada. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 18, GB3002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vitt DH, Wieder K, Halsey LA, Turetsky M (2003) Response of Sphagnum fuscum to nitrogen deposition: a case study of ombrogenous peatlands in Alberta Canada. Bryologist 106:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Walbridge MR, Navaratnnam JA (2006) Phosphorus in boreal peatlands. In: Wieder RK, Vitt DH (eds) Boreal peatland ecosystems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 231–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang M, Moore TR (2014) Carbon nitrogen phosphorus and potassium stoichiometry in an ombrotrophic peatland reflects plant functional type. Ecosystems 17:673–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang M, Murphy M, Moore TR (2014) Nutrient resorption of two evergreen shrubs in response to long-term fertilization in a bog. Oecologia 174:365–377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang M, Moore TR, Talbot J, Riley JL (2015) The stoichiometry of carbon and nutrients in peat formation. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 29:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yu Q, Chen QS, Elser JJ, He NP, Wu HH, Zhang GM, Wu JG, Bai YF, Han XG (2010) Linking stoichiometric homoeostasis with ecosystem structure functioning and stability. Ecol Lett 13:1390–1399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Yu Q, Elser JJ, He NP, Wu HH, Chen QS, Zhang GM, Han X (2011) Stoichiometric homeostasis of vascular plants in the Inner Mongolia grassland. Oecologia 166:1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Zar JH (2009) Biostatistical analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meng Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tuula Larmola
    • 3
    • 4
  • Meaghan T. Murphy
    • 2
  • Tim R. Moore
    • 2
  • Jill L. Bubier
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory for Ecological Forecasting and Global Change, College of ForestryNorthwest A&F UniversityYanglingChina
  2. 2.Department of Geography and Global Environmental & Climate Change CentreMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Environmental Studies DepartmentMount Holyoke CollegeSouth HadleyUSA
  4. 4.Natural Resources Institute FinlandVantaaFinland

Personalised recommendations