Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 418, Issue 1–2, pp 571–579 | Cite as

Retention of dead standing plant biomass (marcescence) increases subsequent litter decomposition in the soil organic layer

  • Šárka Angst
  • Tomáš Cajthaml
  • Gerrit Angst
  • Hana Šimáčková
  • Jiří Brus
  • Jan Frouz
Regular Article

Abstract

Aim

We evaluated the impact of retaining dead standing biomass (marcescence) on subsequent litter decomposition in the soil organic layer.

Methods

Litter of plants that naturally keep dead standing biomass in various extents, Calamagrostis epigeios (keeps most of its dead biomass standing), Quercus robur (keeps some dead leaves on the tree), and Alnus glutinosa (all litter falls to the ground after senescence), were either exposed to environmental climate (ambient) conditions for one year or kept in a dry dark place. After a year, both litter treatments were placed in the soil organic layer for another year. We monitored the mass loss and chemical changes during decomposition.

Results

Changes in the chemical composition of aromatic components in C. epigeios litter and decreasing amounts of aromatic compounds in Q. robur and C. epigeios litter during exposure to ambient conditions indicate an effect of photodegradation on these compounds. The litter of Q. robur also exhibited accelerated subsequent litter decomposition in the soil organic layer. In contrast, an increase of aliphatic and aromatic compounds and a decrease of carbohydrates in A. glutinosa litter during exposure to ambient conditions rather points to leaching or microbial decay of labile compounds than an effect of photodegradation. Moreover, the subsequent decomposition of A. glutinosa litter in the soil organic layer was decelerated as compared to the unexposed litter.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that litter with comparably low quality (Q. robur and C. epigeios), as compared to litter with a high quality (A. glutinosa), is prone to photodegradation. This process facilitates subsequent decomposition in soil.

Keywords

Photodegradation 13C CP/MAS NMR spectroscopy Litter decomposition Pyrolysis GC-MS Calamagrostis epigeios, photo-facilitation 

Abbreviations

ANOVA

Analysis of variance

C

Carbon

CP/MAS

Cross polarization magic angle spinning

GC-MS

Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

N

Nitrogen

NMR

Nuclear magnetic resonance

OL

Organic layer

OM

Organic matter

PCA

Principal component analysis

Py

Pyrolysis

TMAH

Tetramethylammonium hydroxide

UV

Ultraviolet

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the grant No. P504/12/1288 from the Czech Science Foundation and funds from the team project GAJU/04-158/2016/P at the University of South Bohemia. We also thank Jitka Hubačová for help with conducting the experiment, Carsten W. Mueller from the Technical University Munich, Chair of Soil Science for the possibility to write the manuscript at his department, Veronika Jílková for reading the manuscript, and two anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped to improve the manuscript.

References

  1. Abadía A, Gil E, Morales F, Montanés L, Montserrat G, Abadía J (1996) Marcescence and senescence in a submediterranean oak (Quercus subpyrenaica E.H. Del Villar): photosynthetic characteristics and nutrient composition. Plant Cell Environ 19:685–694. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00403.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angst G, Heinrich L, Kögel-Knabner I, Mueller CW (2016) The fate of cutin and suberin of decaying leaves, needles and roots - inferences from the initial decomposition of bound fatty acids. Org Geochem 95:81–92. doi: 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2016.02.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin AT, Ballaré CL (2010) Dual role of lignin in plant litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:4618–4622. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909396107 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Austin AT, Vivanco L (2006) Plant litter decomposition in a semi-arid ecosystem controlled by photodegradation. Nature 442:555–558. doi: 10.1038/nature05038 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Austin AT, Araujo PI, Leva PE (2009) Interaction of position, litter type, and water pulses on decomposition of grasses from the semiarid Patagonian steppe. Ecology 90:2642–2647. doi: 10.1890/08-1804.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Austin AT, Méndez MS, Ballaré CL (2016) Photodegradation alleviates the lignin bottleneck for carbon turnover in terrestrial ecosystems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 201516157. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1516157113
  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. Aust J Soil Res 35:1061–1083. doi: 10.1071/s97004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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. Glob Chang Biol 13:2193–2205. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01428.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cepáková Š, Tošner Z, Frouz J (2016) The effect of tree species on seasonal fluctuations in water-soluble and hot water-extractable organic matter at post-mining sites. Geoderma 275:19–27. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.04.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunberg A (1982) Why beech and oak trees retain leaves until spring: a comment on the contribution by Otto and Nilsson. Oikos 39:275–277. doi: 10.2307/3544497 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frouz J, Cajthaml T, Mudrák O (2011) The effect of lignin photodegradation on decomposability of Calamagrostis epigeios grass litter. Biodegradation 22:1247–1254. doi: 10.1007/s10532-011-9479-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Frouz J, Livečková M, Albrechtová J, Chroňáková A, Cajthaml T, Pižl V, Háněl L, Starý J, Baldrian P, Lhotáková Z, Šimáčková H, Cepáková Š (2013) Is the effect of trees on soil properties mediated by soil fauna? A case study from post-mining sites. For Ecol Manag 309:87–95. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gehrke C, Johanson U, Callaghan TV, Chadwick D, Robinson CH (1995) The impact of enhanced ultraviolet-B radiation on litter quality and decomposition processes in Vaccinium leaves from the subarctic. Oikos 72:213–222. doi: 10.2307/3546223 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Helingerová M, Frouz J, Šantrůčková H (2010) Microbial activity in reclaimed and unreclaimed post-mining sites near Sokolov (Czech Republic). Ecol Eng 36:768–776. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2010.01.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ibrahima A, Joffre R, Gillon D (1995) Changes in litter during the initial leaching phase: an experiment on the leaf litter of Mediterranean species. Soil Biol Biochem 27:931–939. doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(95)00006-Z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaiser K, Guggenberger G, Haumaier L, Zech W (2002) The composition of dissolved organic matter in forest soil solutions: changes induced by seasons and passage through the mineral soil. Org Geochem 33:307–318. doi: 10.1016/S0146-6380(01)00162-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Michalzik B, Kalbitz K, Park JH, Solinger S, Matzner E (2001) Fluxes and concentrations of dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen - a synthesis for temperate forests. Biogeochemistry 52:173–205. doi: 10.1023/A:1006441620810 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mingo A, Oesterheld M (2009) Retention of dead leaves by grasses as a defense against herbivores. A test on the palatable grass Paspalum dilatatum Oikos 118:753–757. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.17293.x
  19. Moorhead DL, Callaghan T (1994) Effects of increasing ultraviolet B radiation on decomposition and soil organic matter dynamics: a synthesis and modelling study. Biol Fertil Soils 18:19–26. doi: 10.1007/BF00336439 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Otto C, Nilsson LM (1981) Why do beech and oak trees retain leaves until spring? Oikos 37:387–390. doi: 10.2307/3544134 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parsons WFJ, Taylor BR, Parkinson D (1990) Decomposition of aspen (Populus tremuloides) leaf litter modified by leaching. Can J For Res 20:943–951. doi: 10.1139/x90-127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rozema J, Tosserams M, Nelissen HJM, Heerwaarden L, Broekman RA, Flierman N (1997) Stratospheric ozone reduction and ecosystem processes: enhanced UV-B radiation affects chemical quality and decomposition of leaves of the dune grassland species Calamagrostis epigeios. Plant Ecol 128:285–294. doi: 10.1023/A:1009723210062 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sampedro I, Cajthaml T, Marinari S, Petruccioli M, Grego S, D’Annibale A (2009) Organic matter transformation and detoxification in dry olive mill residue by the saprophytic fungus Paecilomyces farinosus. Process Biochem 44:216–225. doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2008.10.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Šmilauer P, Lepš P (2014) Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO 5. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Uselman SM, Snyder KA, Blank RR, Jones TJ (2011) UVB exposure does not accelerate rates of litter decomposition in a semi-arid riparian ecosystem. Soil Biol Biochem 43:1254–1265. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.02.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wilson MA (1987) NMR techniques and applications in geochemistry and soil chemistry. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Yanni SF, Suddick EC, Six J (2015) Photodegradation effects on CO2 emissions from litter and SOM and photo-facilitation of microbial decomposition in a California grassland. Soil Biol Biochem 91:40–49. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.08.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ecosystem Biology, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of South BohemiaČeské BudějoviceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Biology Centre of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Institute of Soil Biology & SoWa RIČeské BudějoviceCzech Republic
  3. 3.Institute for Environmental Studies, Faculty of ScienceCharles University in PraguePragueCzech Republic
  4. 4.Institute of Macromolecular Chemistry, Academy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations