Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relating net primary productivity to soil organic matter decomposition rates in pure and mixed Chinese fir plantations

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Plant and Soil Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In a 5-year field trial, we examined plant productivity and soil organic matter decomposition on plots with a mixture of Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata (Lamb.) Hook.) and broadleaved trees. We compared pure fir (PF) plots to two mixed plots (2:1 ratio of fir to broadleaved trees): MP1 (C. lanceolata and Liquidambar formosana Hance) and MP2 (C. lanceolata and Alnus cremastogyne Burk). The mixed plots differed in that the MP2 plots incorporated a nitrogen-fixing tree (A. cremastogyne). We hypothesized that the mixed plots would have higher soil organic matter decomposition rates than the PF plots as a result of increased primary productivity. The increased productivity would increase carbon input into soils, thus resulting in greater microbial biomass and soil basal respiration. We measured tree biomass, soil organic matter decomposition rates, microbial biomass carbon, total organic carbon, metabolic quotient and microbial quotient for each plot. The results showed that the productivity, microbial biomass carbon, and total carbon in the MP2 plots were significantly higher than in the PF and MP1 plots. Path analyses suggested that soil respiration varied with the amount of tree biomass produced. However contrary to our hypothesis, soil basal respiration was higher in the PF plots than in the MP2 plots.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1
Fig 2
Fig 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bardgett RD, Shine A (1999) Linkages between plant litter diversity, soil microbial biomass and ecosystem function in temperate grasslands. Soil Biol Biochem 31:317–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Binkley D, Sollins P (1990) Factors determining differences in soil pH in adjacent conifer and alder-conifer stands. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:1427–1433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown D, Lugo AE (1982) The storage and production of organic matter in tropical forests and their role in the global carbon cycle. Biotropica 14:161–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick RP (1992) A review: long-term effects of agricultural systems on soil biochemical and microbial parameters. Agr Ecosyst Environ 40:25–36

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Feng ZW, Chen CY, Zhang JW et al (1988) A coniferous broad-leaved mixed forest with higher productivity and ecological harmony in subtropics-study on mixed forest of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Michelia macclurei. Acta Phytoecogica Et Geobotanica Sinica 12(3):165–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Giardina CP, Huffinan S, Binkley D, Cauldwell BA (1995) Alders increase soil phosphorus availability in a Douglas-fir plantation. Can J For Res 25:1652–1657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo J (2008) Comparison of soil organic carbon and nitrogen pool between mixed and pure forests of Chinese fir. J Fujian For Sci Tech 35(2):5–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu Y, Wang S, Zeng D (2006) Effects of single Chinese fir and mixed leaf litters on soil chemical, microbial properties and soil enzyme activities. Plant Soil 282:379–386

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huang Y, Feng Z, Wang S et al (2004) Effects of Chinese-fir mixing with N-fixing and non-N fixing tree species on forestland quality and forest-floor solution chemistry. [J] Acta Ecologica Sinia 24(10):2192–2199

    Google Scholar 

  • Insam H, Domsch KH (1988) Relationship between soil organic carbon and microbial biomass on chronosequences of reclamation sites. Microb Ecol 15:177–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia Y, Wang T, Du R (2005) Study on variety of the content of carbon and nitrogen in different type of soil. J Beijing Agri Col 20(3):63–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Landi F, Valori J, Ascher J, Renella G, Falchini L, Nannipieri P (2006) Root exudates effects on the bacterial communities, CO2 evolution, nitrogen transformations and ATP content of rhizosphere and bulk soils. Soil Biol Biochem 38(3):509–516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lei JF (2005) Forest resources of China. Chinese Forestry, Beijing, pp 172–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao L, Yang Y, Wang S et al (1999) Distribution, decomposition and nutrient return of the fine root in pure Cunninghamia lanceolata, Michelia macclurei and the mixed plantation. [J] Acta Ecologica Sinia 19(3):342–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Han S, Hu Y, Dai G (2005) Effects of soil temperature and humidity on soil respiration rate under pinus sylvestriformis forest. Chin J Appl Ecol 16(9):1581–1585

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lu RK (1999) Analysis methods of soil agricultural chemistry. China Agricultural Science and Technology, Beijing, pp 228–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Montagnini F, Porras C (1998) Evaluating the role of plantations as carbon sinks: an example of an integrative approach from the humid tropics. Environ Manage 22(3):459–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mu S (2004) Respiration of soils under temperate deciduous, coniferous and mixed forest. Acta Pedologia Sin 41(4):564–570

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy M, Balser T, Buchmann N, Hahn V, Potvin C (2008) Linking tree biodiversity to belowground process in a young tropical plantation: impacts on soil CO2 flux. For Eco Manage 255:2577–2588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piao HC, Zhu JM, Liu GS, Liu CQ, Tao FX (2006) Changes of natural 13C abundance in microbial biomass during litter decomposition. Appl Soil Ecol 33(1):3–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raich JW, Schlesinger WH (1992) The global carbon dioxide flux in soil respiration and its relation to vegetation and climates. Tellus 44B:81–99

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Redondo-Brenes A, Montagnini F (2006) Growth, productivity, aboveground biomass, and carbon sequestration of pure and mixed native tree plantations in the Caribbean lowlands of Costa Rica. For Eco Manage 232:168–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Miegroet H, Cole D, Binkley D, Sollins P (1989) The effect of nitrogen accumulation and nitrification on soil chemical properties in alder forests. In: Olson RK, LeFohn AS (eds) Effects of air pollution on western forests. Air Waste Manage. Assoc, Pittsburgh, pp 515–528

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance ED, Brookes PC, Jenkinson DS (1987) An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol Biochem 19:703–707

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Liao L, Ma Y (1997) Nutrient return and productivity of mixed Cunninghamia lanceolata and Michelia Maoclurei plantations. Chin J Appl Ecol 8(4):347–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Wang S, Fan B, Yu X (2007) Litter production, leaf litter decomposition and nutrient return in Cunninghamia lanceolata plantation in south China: effect of planting conifers with broadleaved species. Plant Soil 297:201–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Wang S, Huang Y (2008a) Comparison of litterfall, litter decomposition and nutrient return in a monoculture Cunninghamia lanceolata and a mixed stand in southern China. For Ecol Manag 255:1210–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Lei Y, Wang X et al (2008b) A review of forest biomass models. J Northwest For Univ 23(2):58–63

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xu GH, Zhen HY (1986) Manual on microbial analysis method of soil. Agriculture, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu M, Qi Y (2001) Soil surface CO2 efflux and its spatial and temporal variations in a young ponderosa pine plantation in northern California. Glob Chang Biol 7:667–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan S, Wang S, Yu X (2004) Effect of mixtures with alders on soil fauna in plantation forest of Chinese fir. Chin J Appl Environ 10:462–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang Q, Li M, Wang B (2004) Study on soil respiration of the lower subtropical successive forest communities. Guihaia 24(5):443–449

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L, Wang B, Liu Y, Chen B, Ao J (2007) A study on the soil respiration under four forest types in dagangshan in summer and autumn. Acta Agri Univ Jiangxiensis 29(1):72–77

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Wang S, Wang Q, Liu Y (2009) Content and seasonal change in soil labile organic carbon under different forest covers. Chin J Eco-Agri 17(1):41–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng YS, Ding YX (1998) Effect of mixed forests of Chinese fir and tsoong’s tree on soil properties. Pedosphere 8(2):161–168

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was made possible with financial support from the Knowledge Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-YW-405) and the National Science Foundation projects (30590381-07). We also thank Zhang Xiuyong and Xu Guangbiao for assistance in collecting samples in the field.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Huitong Experimental Station of Forest Ecology, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang, 110016, China

    Silong Wang & Weidong Zhang

  2. Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100039, China

    Weidong Zhang

  3. USDA Forest Service, 3041 Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, 27709, USA

    Felipe Sanchez

Authors
  1. Silong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Weidong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felipe Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silong Wang.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Eric Paterson.

Appendix

Appendix

Linear Regression to Estimate Biomass in Kilograms for the Three Tree Species in This Study

species

component

Equation

R2

C. lamcealata

Coarse root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {1}.{932} \times {\hbox{V}} + {47}.{89} \)

0.624

Medium root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {1}.0{7}0 \times {\hbox{V}} + {36}.{31} \)

0.601

Fine root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {1}.00{1} \times {\hbox{V}} + {9}.{546} \)

0.643

Stem wood

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {12}.{68} \times {\hbox{V}} + {184}.{3} \)

0.944

Stem bark

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {3}.{447} \times {\hbox{V}} + {61}.{89} \)

0.759

Branches

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {3}.{844} \times {\hbox{V}} + {85}.{66} \)

0.660

Foliage

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {7}.0{67} \times {\hbox{V}} + {152}.{2} \)

0.746

Stem root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {2}.{873} \times {\hbox{V}} + {62}.{66} \)

0.820

Aboveground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {25}.{59} \times {\hbox{V}} + {519}.0 \)

0.895

Belowground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {6}.{89}0 \times {\hbox{V}} + {154}.{9} \)

0.786

Total biomass

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {32}.{48} \times {\hbox{V}} + {674}.0 \)

0.900

L. formosana

Coarse root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {526}.{\hbox{6ln}}\left( {\hbox{V}} \right) - {1},{5}00 \)

0.368

Medium root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = 0.{731} \times {\hbox{V}} + {124}.0 \)

0.273

Stem wood

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {21}.{9} \times {\hbox{V}} + {534}.{9} \)

0.843

Stem bark

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {3}.{717} \times {\hbox{V}} + {99}.{28} \)

0.808

Branches

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {8}.{683} \times {\hbox{V}} + {99}.{18} \)

0.775

Foliage

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {368}.{\hbox{5ln}}\left( {\hbox{V}} \right) - {1},0{57} \)

0.537

Stem root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {592}.{\hbox{3ln}}\left( {\hbox{V}} \right) - {1},{649} \)

0.650

Aboveground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {37}.{99} \times {\hbox{V}} + {928}.{1} \)

0.892

Belowground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {11}.{56} \times {\hbox{V}} + {873}.{5} \)

0.613

Total biomass

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {49}.{56} \times {\hbox{V}} + {1},{8}0{1} \)

0.875

A. cremastogyne

Coarse root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {2}.{1}0{2} \times {\hbox{V}} + {232}.{3} \)

0.586

Medium root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = - 0.{36} \times {\hbox{V}} + {726} \)

0.614

Fine root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = - 0.{171} \times {\hbox{V}} + {289}.{7} \)

0.450

Stem wood

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {13}.{21} \times {\hbox{V}} + {1},{513} \)

0.918

Stem bark

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {13}.{21} \times {\hbox{V}} + {1},{513} \)

0.798

Branches

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {5}.{359} \times {\hbox{V}} + {4}0{8}.{9} \)

0.600

Foliage

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {5}.{333} \times {\hbox{V}} - {1},{1}0{9} \)

0.598

Cone

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {2}.{691} \times {\hbox{V}} - {527}.{8} \)

0.654

Stump root

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {1}.{883} \times {\hbox{V}} + {513}.{5} \)

0.790

Aboveground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {28}.{24} \times {\hbox{V}} + {5}0{3}.{1} \)

0.838

Belowground

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {3}.{77}0 \times {\hbox{V}} + {1},{399} \)

0.725

Total biomass

\( {\hbox{Y}} = {32}.0{1} \times {\hbox{V}} + {1},{9}0{2} \)

0.840

Y: the biomass of each component in gram. V = (DBH)2*height

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, S., Zhang, W. & Sanchez, F. Relating net primary productivity to soil organic matter decomposition rates in pure and mixed Chinese fir plantations. Plant Soil 334, 501–510 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0400-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0400-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation