Fluxes, stocks and availability of nitrogen in evergreen broadleaf and fir forests: similarities and differences

Abstract

In this study, nitrogen fluxes or flows in litterfall, nitrogen stocks and available nitrogen in soils of two plots representing evergreen broadleaf and Bulgarian fir forests were assessed. Both plots are in good quality sites and for this reason, the litterfall quantities and nitrogen fluxes were relatively high. The woody litterfall flux of nitrogen was significantly higher in the fir forest than in the evergreen broadleaf one. The total nitrogen stock was higher in the soil under the fir forest. However, the percentage of the available nitrogen (ammonium + nitrates) was significantly higher in the upper 20 cm soil layer of the evergreen broadleaf forest in spite of the higher average C/N ratios in the foliar litterfall of the broadleaf forest and insignificant difference of the C/N ratios in all soil layers of the two ecosystems. The microclimatic conditions (higher soil temperatures in the evergreen broadleaf forest) is probable possible cause for this difference. The available nitrogen in the soils and its retranslocation from senescing leaves cover the nitrogen requirements of trees. It is hypothesized that trees may also take up nitrogen from deeper soil layers.

Keywords

Maquis / Fir / Nitrogen / Litterfall fluxes / Soil

References

[1] Aerts R. Climate, leaf litter chemistry and leaf decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: a triangular relationship. Oikos, 1997, 79: 439-449.

[2] Albrektson A. Needle litterfall in stands of Pinus sylvestris L. in Sweden, in relation to site quality, stand age and latitude. Scand J For Res, 1988, 3: 333-342.

[3] Ben Dechil A, Ghorbel A, Boubacker T. Direct determination of nitrate in natural water by ultraviolet first derivative spectrophotometry. Anal Chem Indian J, 2014, 14: 318-327.

[4] Benton Jones J Jr. Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis, 2001, London: CRC Press 363

[5] Bussotti F, Borghini F, Celesti C, Leonzio C, Cozzi A, Bettini D, Ferretti M. Leaf shedding, crown condition and element return in two mixed holm oak forests in Tuscany, central Italy. For Ecol Manag, 2003, 176: 273-285.

[6] Carlyle JC. Nitrogen cycling in forested ecosystems. For Abstr, 1986, 5: 307-336.

[7] Cole DW, Rapp M. Reichle DE. Elemental cycling in forest ecosystems. Dynamic properties of forest ecosystems, 1981, London: Cambridge University Press 341 409

[8] Cools N, Vesterdal L, De Vos B, Vanguelova E, Kansen K. Tree species is the major factor explaining C:N ratios in European forest soils. For Ecol Manag, 2014, 311: 3-16.

[9] Dallman PR. Plant life in the world’s Mediterranean climates, 1998, Berkley, Los Angeles: University of California Press 258

[10] Dannenmann M, Gasche R, Ledebuhr A, Papen H. Effects of forest management on soil N cycling in beech forests stocking on calcareous soils. Plant Soil, 2006, 287: 279-300.

[11] Davidson EA, Savage K, Bolstad P, Clark DA, Curtis PS, Ellsworthe DS, Hanson PJ, Law BE, Luo Y, Pregitzeri KS, Randolphj JC, Zak D. Belowground carbon allocation in forests estimated from litterfall and IRGA-based soil respiration measurements. Agric For Meteorol, 2002, 113: 39-51.

[12] FAO-UNESCO. Soil map of the world, 1988, Rome: FAO, UNESCO 119

[13] Farina A, Piergallini R, Doldo A, Salsano EP, Abballe F. The determination of C-H-N by an automated elemental analyzer. Microchem J, 1991, 43: 181-190.

[14] Finer L. Variation in the amount and quality of litterfall in a Pinus sylvestris L. stand growing on a bog. For Ecol Manag, 1996, 80: 1-11.

[15] Gundersen P, Callesen I, de Vries W. Nitrate leaching in forest ecosystems is related to forest floor C/N ratios. Environ Pollut, 1998, 102: 403-407.

[16] Guntiňas ME, Leirós Trasar-Cepeda C, Gil-Sotres F. Effects of moisture and temperature on net soil nitrogen mineralization: a laboratory study. Eur J Soil Biol, 2012, 48: 73-80.

[17] Hansen K, Vesterdal L, Schmidt IK, Gundersen P, Sevel L, Bastrup-Birk A, Pedersen LP, Hansen JB. Litterfall and nutrient return in five tree species in a common garden experiment. For Ecol Manag, 2009, 257: 2133-2144.

[18] Hoyle FC, Murphy DV, Fillery IRP. Temperature and stubble management influence microbial CO₂ -C evolution and gross N transformation rates. Soil Biol Biochem, 2006, 38: 71-80.

[19] Jílková V, Straková P, Frouz J. Foliage C:N ratio, stage of organic matter decomposition and interaction with soil affect microbial respiration and its response to C and N addition more than C:N changes during decomposition. Appl Soil Ecol, 2020, 152: 103568.

[20] Keeney DR. Prediction of soil nitrogen availability in forest ecosystems: a literature review. For Sci, 1980, 1: 159-171.

[21] Kouki J, Hokkanen T. Long-term needle litterfall of a Scots pine Pinus sylvestris stand: relation to temperature factors. Oecologia, 1992, 89: 176-181.

[22] Miller WP, Miller DM. A micro-pipette method for soil mechanical analysis. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal, 1987, 18: 1-15.

[23] Miller JC, Miller JN. Statistics for analytical chemistry, 1988 2 Chichester: Ellis Horwood Limited 227

[24] Nambiar EKS, Fife DN. Nutrient retranslocation in temperate conifers. Tree Physiol, 1991, 9: 185-207.

[25] Portillo-Estrada M, Korhonen FJ, Pihlatie M, Pumpanen J, Frumau Arnoud KF, Moril L, Tosens T, Niinemets U. Inter-and intra-annual variations in canopy fine litterfall and carbon and nitrogen inputs to the forest floor in two European coniferous forests. Ann For Sci, 2013, 70: 367-379.

[26] Rahman MM, Tsukamoto J, Rahman MM, Yoneyama A, Mostafa KM. Lignin and its effects on litter decomposition in forest ecosystems. Chem Ecol, 2013, 29: 540-553.

[27] Raich JW, Nadelhoffer KJ. Belowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems: global trends. Ecology, 1989, 70: 1346-1354.

[28] Rapp M, Regina IS, Rico M, Gallego HA. Biomass, nutrient content, litterfall and nutrient return to the soil in Mediterranean oak forests. For Ecol Manag, 1999, 119: 39-49.

[29] Rennenberg H, Dannenmann M. Nitrogen nutrition of trees in temperate forests-the significance of nitrogen availability in the pedosphere and atmosphere. Forests, 2015, 6: 2820-2835.

[30] Rennenberg H, Dannenmann M, Gessler A, Kreuzwieser J, Simon J, Papen H. Nitrogen balance in forests: nutritional limitation of plants under climate change stresses. Plant Biol, 2009, 11: 4-23.

[31] Sayer EJ. Using experimental manipulation to assess the roles of leaf litter in the functioning of forest ecosystems. Biol Rev, 2006, 81: 1-31.

[32] UN-ICP-Forests (2020) International Co-operative Programme on assessment and monitoring of air pollution effects on forests operating under the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). www.ICP-Forests.org

[33] Vesterdal L, Schmidt IK, Callesen I, Nilson LO, Gundersen P. Carbon and nitrogen in forest floor and mineral soil under six common European tree species. For Ecol Manag, 2008, 255: 35-48.

[34] Vesterdal L, Clarke N, Sigurdsson BD, Gundersen P. Do tree species influence soil carbon stocks in temperate and boreal forests?. For Ecol Manag, 2013, 30: 4-18.

[35] Vitousek PM, Farrington H. Nutrient limitation and soil development: experimental test of a biogeochemical theory. Biogeochemistry, 1997, 37: 63-75.

[36] Xu S, Liu LL, Sayer EJ. Variability of above-ground litter inputs alters soil physicochemical and biological processes: a meta-analysis of litterfall-manipulation experiments. Biogeosciences, 2013, 10: 7423-7433.

[37] Zhou G, Xu S, Ciais P, Manzoni S, Fang J, Yu G, Tang X, Zhou P, Wang W, Yan J, Wang G, Ma K, Li S, Du S, Han S, Ma Y, Zhang D, Liu J, Liu S, Chu G, Zhang Q, Li Y, Huang W, Ren H, Lu X, Chen X. Climate and litter C/N ratio constrain soil organic carbon accumulation. Natl Sci Rev, 2019, 6: 746-757.