Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 423, Issue 1–2, pp 87–98 | Cite as

Compositional aspects of herbaceous litter decomposition in the freshwater marshes of the Florida Everglades

  • Oliva Pisani
  • Min Gao
  • Nagamitsu Maie
  • Toshikazu Miyoshi
  • Daniel L. Childers
  • Rudolf Jaffé
Regular Article

Abstract

Aims

Litter decomposition in wetlands is an important component of ecosystem function in these detrital systems. In oligotrophic wetlands, such as the Florida Everglades, litter decomposition processes are dependent on nutrient availability and litter quality. The aim of this study was to assess the differences and changes in chemical composition of above- and belowground plant tissues at different stages of decomposition, and to compare them to organic matter accumulating in wetland surface soils.

Methods

To understand the chemical changes occurring during the early stages of litter decomposition in wetlands, short-term subaqueous decomposition patterns of above- and belowground tissues from Cladium jamaicense and Eleocharis cellulosa were investigated at two freshwater marsh sites in the Florida Everglades. The composition of litter at different stages of decomposition was compared to that of the two end-members, namely fresh plant tissues and soil organic matter (SOM), in an effort to assess both the gradual transformation of this organic matter (OM) and the incorporation of above- vs. belowground biomass to wetland soils. The chemical composition of the litter and of surface soils was assessed using solid-state 13C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Results

Decomposition indices (alkyl/O-alkyl ratio, Aromaticity index) of Cladium and Eleocharis leaves varied during incubation likely reflecting physical leaching processes followed by a shift to microbial decomposition. Overall, Eleocharis leaves were more labile compared to Cladium leaves. Relative to aboveground litter, the belowground biomass of both species was more resistant to degradation, and roots were more resistant than rhizomes. Compared to the observed early diagenetic transformations of the plant litter, the SOM is at a more advanced stage of degradation, suggesting that the decomposition of litter and belowground biomass prior to its incorporation into wetland soils requires longer degradation times than those applied in this study.

Conclusions

Litter decomposition in Everglades’ freshwater marshes is driven by a combination of tissue quality and site characteristics such as hydroperiod and nutrient availability, ultimately leading to the accumulation of peat.

Keywords

Litter decomposition Cladium jamaicense Eleocharis cellulosa Soil organic matter Soil formation Florida Everglades 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation through the Florida Coastal Everglades Long-Term Ecological Research program under Grant No. DEB-9910514 and Grant No. DEB-1237517. Additional support through the George Barley Endowment is acknowledged. The authors thank Dr. Myrna Simpson from the University of Toronto for helpful comments on the original manuscript. This is contribution number 849 from the Southeast Environmental Research Center at FIU.

References

  1. Baldock JA, Oades JM, Waters AG, Peng X, Vassallo AM, Wilson MA (1992) Aspects of the chemical structure of soil organic materials as revealed by solid-state 13C NMR spectroscopy. Biogeochemistry 16:1–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Battle JM, Golladay SW (2007) How hydrology, habitat type, and litter quality affect leaf breakdown in wetlands on the Gulf Coastal Plain of Georgia. Wetlands 27:251–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benner R, Fogel ML, Sprague EK, Hodson RE (1987) Depletion of 13C in lignin and its implications for stable carbon isotope studies. Nature 329:708–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benner R, Hatcher PG, Hedges JI (1990) Early diagenesis of mangrove leaves in a tropical estuary: bulk chemical characterization using solid-state 13C NMR and elemental analyses. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 54:2003–2013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benner R, Fogel ML, Sprague EK (1991) Diagenesis of belowground biomass of Spartina alterniflora in salt-marsh sediments. Limnol Oceanogr 36:1358–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bridgham SD, Megonigal JP, Keller JK, Bliss NB, Trettin C (2006) The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chambers RM, Pederson KA (2006) Variation in soil phosphorus, sulfur, and iron pools among south Florida wetlands. Hydrobiologia 569:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Childers DL, Doren RF, Jones R, Noe GB, Rugge M, Scinto LJ (2003) Decadal change in vegetation and soil phosphorus pattern across the Everglades landscape. J Environ Qual 32:344–362CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Childers DL, Boyer JN, Davis SE, Madden CJ, Rudnick DT, Sklar FH (2006a) Relating precipitation and water management to nutrient concentrations in the oligotrophic “upside-down” estuaries of the Florida Everglades. Limnol Oceanogr 51:602–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Childers DL, Iwaniec D, Rondeau D, Rubio G, Verdon E, Madden CJ (2006b) Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569:273–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corstanje R, Reddy KR, Portier KM (2006) Typha latifolia and Cladium jamaicense litter decay in response to exogenous nutrient enrichment. Aquat Bot 84:70–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis SM (1991) Growth, decomposition and nutrient retention of Cladium jamaicense Crantz and Typha domingensis Pers. in the Florida Everglades. Aquat Bot 40:203–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis S, Childers DL, Noe G (2006) The contribution of leaching to the rapid release of nutrients and carbon in the early decay of wetland vegetation. Hydrobiologia 569:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DeBusk WF, Reddy KR (2005) Litter decomposition and nutrient dynamics in a phosphorus enriched Everglades marsh. Biogeochemistry 75:217–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ertel JR, Hedges JI (1984) The lignin component of humic substances: distribution among soil and sedimentary humic, fulvic and base-insoluble fractions. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 48:2065–2074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ewe SML, Gaiser EE, Childers DL, Iwaniec D, Rivera-Monroy VH, Twilley RR (2006) Spatial and temporal patterns of aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) along two freshwater-estuarine transects in the Florida Coastal Everglades. Hydrobiologia 569:459–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gao M (2007) Chemical characterization of soil organic matter in an oligotrophic, subtropical, freshwater wetland system: sources, diagenesis and preservation. Florida International University, DissertationGoogle Scholar
  18. Gingerich RT, Merovich G, Anderson JT (2014) Influence of environmental parameters on litter decomposition in wetlands in West Virginia, USA. J Freshw Ecol 29:535–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gunderson LH (1994) Vegetation of the Everglades: determinants of community composition. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades: the ecosystem and its restoration, St. Lucie press, Delray Beach, Florida, pp 323–340Google Scholar
  20. Hajje N, Jaffé R (2006) Molecular characterization of Cladium peat from the Florida Everglades: biomarker associations with humic fractions. Hydrobiologia 569:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kayranli B, Scholz M, Mustafa A, Hedmard Å (2010) Carbon storage and fluxes within freshwater wetlands: a critical review. Wetlands 30:111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kögel-Knabner I (2002) The macromolecular organic composition of plant material residues as inputs to soil organic matter. Soil Bio Biochemist 34:139–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Larsen LG, Harvey JW (2010) How vegetation and sediment transport feedbacks drive landscape change in the Everglades and wetland worldwide. Am Nat 176:E66–E79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Larsen LG, Harvey JW, Crimaldi JP (2007) A delicate balance: Ecohydrological feedbacks governing landscape morphology in a lotic peatland. Ecol Monogr 77:591–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lu XQ, Maie N, Hanna JV, Childers DL, Jaffè R (2003) Molecular characterization of dissolved organic matter in freshwater wetlands of the Florida Everglades. Water Res 37:2599–2606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Ma C, Xiong Y, Li L, Guo D (2016) Root and leaf decomposition become decoupled over time: implications for below- and above-ground relationships. Funct Ecol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12619
  27. Maie N, Yang CY, Miyoshi T, Parish K, Jaffè R (2005) Chemical characteristics of dissolved organic matter in an oligotrophic subtropical wetland/estuarine ecosystem. Limnol Oceanogr 50:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maie N, Jaffé R, Miyoshi T, Childers DL (2006) Quantitative and qualitative aspects of dissolved organic carbon leached from senescent plants in an oligotrophic wetland. Biogeochemistry 78:285–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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 Bio Biochemist 39:993–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McVoy CW, Said WP, Obeysekera J, VanArman JA, Dreschel TW (2011) Landscapes and hydrology of the predrainage Everglades. University Press of Florida, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
  31. Melillo JM, Aber JD, Muratore JF (1982) Nitrogen and lignin control of hardwood leaf litter decomposition dynamics. Ecology 63:621–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2015) Wetlands. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Nelson PN, Baldock JA (2005) Estimating the molecular composition of a diverse range of natural organic materials from solid-state 13C NMR and elemental analyses. Biogeochemistry 72:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Neto RR, Mead RN, Louda JW, Jaffé R (2006) Organic biogeochemistry of detrital flocculent material (floc) in a subtropical, coastal wetland. Biogeochemistry 77:283–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newman S, Kumpf H, Laing JA, Kennedy WC (2001) Decomposition responses to phosphorus enrichment in an Everglades (United States of America) slough. Biogeochemistry 54:229–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noe GB, Childers DL (2007) Phosphorus budgets in Everglades wetland ecosystems: the effects of hydrology and nutrient enrichment. Wetl Ecol Manag 15:189–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Noe GB, Childers DL, Jones RD (2001) Phosphorus biogeochemistry and the impact of P enrichment: why is the Everglades so unique? Ecosystems 4:603–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Otto A, Simpson MJ (2006) Evaluation of CuO oxidation parameters for determining the source and stage of lignin degradation in soil. Biogeochemistry 80:121–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pisani O, Louda JW, Jaffé R (2013) Biomarker assessment of spatial and temporal changes in the composition of flocculent material (floc) in the subtropical wetland of the Florida Coastal Everglades. Environ Chem 10:424–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pisani O, Scinto LJ, Munyon JW, Jaffé R (2015) The respiration of flocculent detrital organic matter (floc) is driven by phosphorus limitation and substrate quality in a subtropical wetland. Geoderma 241-242:272–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Poi de Neiff A, Neiff JJ, Casco SL (2006) Leaf litter decomposition in three wetland types of the Paraná River floodplain. Wetlands 26:558–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Preston CM, Trofymow JA, CIDEW Group (2000) Variability in litter quality and its relationship to litter decay in Canadian forests. Can J Bot 78:1269–1287Google Scholar
  43. Qualls RG, Richardson CJ (2000) Phosphorus enrichment affects litter decomposition, immobilization, and soil microbial phosphorus in wetland mesocosms. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:799–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rasse DP, Rumpel C, Dignac MF (2005) Is soil carbon mostly root carbon? Mechanisms for a specific stabilization. Plant Soil 269:341–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Richardson CJ, Ferrell GM, Vaithiyanathan P (1999) Nutrient effects on stand structure, resorption efficiency, and secondary compounds in Everglades sawgrass. Ecology 80:2182–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rubio GA, Childers DL (2006) Controls on herbaceous litter decomposition in the estuarine ecotones of the Florida Everglades. Estuar Coasts 29:257–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Saunders CJ, Gao M, Lynch JA, Jaffé R, Childers DL (2006) Using soil profiles of seeds and molecular markers as proxies for sawgrass and wet prairie slough vegetation in shark slough, Everglades National Park. Hydrobiologia 569:475–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saunders CJ, Gao M, Jaffé R (2015) Environmental assessment of vegetation and hydrological conditions in Everglades freshwater marshes using multiple geochemical proxies. Aquat Sci 77:271–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Serna A, Richards JH, Scinto LJ (2013) Plant decomposition in wetlands: effects of hydrologic variation in a re-created Everglades. J Environ Qual 42:562–572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Simpson MJ, Otto A, Feng X (2008) Comparison of solid-state carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance and organic matter biomarkers for assessing soil organic matter degradation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 72:268–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thevenot M, Dignac MF, Rumpel C (2010) Fate of lignins in soil: a review. Soil Bio Biochemist 42:1200–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Todd MJ, Muneepeerakul R, Pumo D, Azaele S, Miralles-Wilhelm F, Rinaldo A, Rodriguez-Iturbe I (2010) Hydrological drivers of wetland vegetation community distribution within Everglades National Park, Florida. Adv Water Resour 33:1279–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tremblay L, Benner R (2006) Microbial contributions to N-immobilization and organic matter preservation in decaying plant detritus. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 70:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Valiela I, Teal JM, Allen SD, Van Etten R, Goehringer D, Volkmann S (1985) Decomposition in salt marsh ecosystems: the phases and major factors affecting disappearance of above-ground organic matter. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 89:29–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Virzo De Santo A, De Marco A, Fierro A, Berg B, Rutigliano FA (2009) Factors regulating litter mass loss and lignin degradation in late decomposition stages. Plant Soil 318:217–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Southeast Environmental Research CenterFlorida International UniversityFloridaUSA
  2. 2.USDA-ARS, Southeast Watershed Research LaboratoryTiftonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Chemistry & BiochemistryFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA
  4. 4.School of Veterinary MedicineKitasato UniversityAomoriJapan
  5. 5.Department of Polymer ScienceUniversity of AkronAkronUSA
  6. 6.School of SustainabilityArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations