Experimental Warming Alters Productivity and Isotopic Signatures of Tundra Mosses
- 468 Downloads
In the tundra, mosses play an important functional role regulating belowground and ecosystem processes, but there is still considerable uncertainty about how tundra moss communities will respond to climate change. We examined the effects of 5 years of in situ air and soil warming on net primary productivity (NPP), carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) isotope signatures (δ13C and δ15N), and C:N in dominant Alaskan tundra mosses. Air warming increased mean air temperatures by up to 0.5°C and resulted in an 80–90% reduction in NPP in the feather moss Pleurozium and the peat moss Sphagnum. Soil warming increased permafrost thaw depth by 12–18%, upper soil water content by 23–27%, and resulted in a threefold increase in Sphagnum NPP. δ13C was positively correlated with moss NPP, and increased by 0.5–1‰ in all mosses under soil warming. C:N was reduced in Sphagnum and Pleurozium, due to increases in tissue %N in the soil warming treatment, suggesting that moss N availability could increase as temperatures increases. Higher N availability in warmer conditions, however, may be offset by unfavorable moisture conditions for moss growth. Similar to responses in tundra vascular plant communities, our results forecast interspecific differences in productivity among tundra mosses. Specifically, air warming may reduce productivity in Sphagnum and Pleurozium, but soil warming could offset this response in Sphagnum. Such responses may lead to changes in tundra moss community structure and function as temperatures increase that have the potential to alter tundra C and N cycling in a future climate.
Keywordsglobal change permafrost bryophytes Sphagnum Pleurozium Dicranum NPP δ13C δ15N
- ACIA. 2004. Impacts of a warming Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Arft AM, Walker MD, Gurevitch JEA, Alatalo JM, Bret-Harte MS, Dale M, Wookey PA. 1999. Responses of tundra plants to experimental warming: meta-analysis of the international tundra experiment. Ecol Monogr 69(4):491–511.Google Scholar
- Handley LL, Austin AT, Stewart GR, Robinson D, Scrimgeour CM, Raven JA, Schmidt S. 1999. The 15N natural abundance (·15N) of ecosystem samples reflects measures of water availability. Funct Plant Biol 26(2):185–99.Google Scholar
- Hedenäs LARS, Bisang IRENE. 2004. Key to European Dicranum species. Herzogia 17:179–97.Google Scholar
- Hobbie SE, Chapin FS. 1998. Response of tundra plant biomass, aboveground production, nitrogen, and CO2 flux to experimental warming. Ecology 79:1526–44.Google Scholar
- Houghton JT, Filho LGM, Callander BA, Harris N, Kattenberg A, Maskell K, Eds. 1996. Climate change 1995: the science of climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Houle D, Bilodeau Gauthier S, Paquet S, Planas D, Warren A. 2006. Identification of two genera of N2-fixing cyanobacteria growing on three feather moss species in boreal forests of Quebec, Canada. Botany 84(6):1025–9.Google Scholar
- IPCC. 2013. Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- R Core Team. 2015. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/.
- van Wijk MT, Clemmensen KE, Shaver GR, Williams M, Callaghan TV, Chapin FS. 2004. Long-term ecosystem level experiments at Toolik Lake, Alaska, and at Abisko, Northern Sweden: generalizations and differences in ecosystem and plant type responses to global change. Glob Change Biol 10:105–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Walker MD. 1996. Community baseline measurements for ITEX studies. In: Molau U, Mølgaard P, Eds. International tundra experiment (ITEX) manual. Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center. p 39–41.Google Scholar