Similar soil aggregation but contrasting carbon and nitrogen stocks among existing Eucalyptus stands with different admixed species
Yu Yan , Yuhong Cui , Qiuye Chen , Miao Guo , Tairui Liu , Shaoming Ye
Journal of Forestry Research ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (1) : 182
Mixed-species plantations can modify both soil aggregation and organic-matter dynamics, but similar aggregate responses need not produce comparable carbon and nitrogen storage. This study compared two 12-year-old mixed stands, Eucalyptus–Mytilaria laosensis (EM) and Eucalyptus–Erythrophleum fordii (EE), with pure Eucalyptus (EP). Each stand type comprised five independent plots, with soil sampled at 0–20 and 20–40 cm for aggregate-size distribution, operational carbon and nitrogen fractions, microbial biomass, and potential hydrolytic enzyme activities. Relative to EP, the > 2 mm aggregate proportion was 16–28% higher in both EM and EE across the two layers, indicating a shared shift toward macroaggregation. The 0–40 cm stock responses nevertheless diverged. Soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) stocks were 14% and 31% higher in EM than in EP, respectively, whereas EE met the ± 15% equivalence criterion relative to EP for both SOC and TN. For EM versus EP, the TN difference exceeded the upper equivalence bound and was therefore non-equivalent; the SOC 90% confidence interval crossed the upper bound, so SOC equivalence was not demonstrated. In EM, the additional carbon and nitrogen were concentrated in LOC, semi-LOC, AN, and AAN, whereas ROC differed little. These changes coincided with greater microbial biomass and potential enzyme activities, consistent with closer coupling between microbial resource processing and profile carbon–nitrogen accumulation in EM. Thus, a shared shift toward macroaggregation can accompany contrasting storage outcomes among Eucalyptus mixtures. Assessments of mixed stands should integrate aggregate distribution, profile stocks, microbial biomass, and potential enzyme activities when selecting admixed species.
Eucalyptus mixed plantation / Soil aggregate / Labile organic carbon / Microbial biomass / Tree species identity
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
FAO. Global forest resources assessment 2020: main report. 2020, Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
IPCC. Climate change and land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. 2019, Geneva, Switzerland, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
Lenth RV (2024) emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package version 1.10.0 |
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
| [53] |
|
| [54] |
|
| [55] |
|
| [56] |
|
| [57] |
|
| [58] |
|
| [59] |
|
| [60] |
|
| [61] |
Oksanen J, Simpson GL, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H, Barbour M, Bedward M, Bolker B, Borcard D, Carvalho G, Chirico M, De Caceres M, Durand S, Evangelista HBA, FitzJohn R, Friendly M, Furneaux B, Hannigan G, Hill MO, Lahti L, McGlinn D, Ouellette M, Cunha ER, Smith T, Stier A, Ter Braak CJF, Weedon J (2024) vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.6-6 |
| [62] |
|
| [63] |
|
| [64] |
|
| [65] |
|
| [66] |
|
| [67] |
|
| [68] |
|
| [69] |
|
| [70] |
|
| [71] |
|
| [72] |
|
| [73] |
|
| [74] |
|
| [75] |
|
| [76] |
|
| [77] |
|
| [78] |
|
| [79] |
|
| [80] |
|
| [81] |
Tabatabai MA (1994) Soil enzymes. In: Weaver RW, Angle JS, Bottomley PS (eds) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Microbiological and Biochemical Properties. SSSA Book Series 5. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 775–833. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.2.c37 |
| [82] |
|
| [83] |
|
| [84] |
|
| [85] |
|
| [86] |
|
| [87] |
|
| [88] |
|
| [89] |
|
| [90] |
|
| [91] |
|
| [92] |
|
| [93] |
|
| [94] |
|
| [95] |
|
| [96] |
|
| [97] |
|
| [98] |
|
| [99] |
|
| [100] |
|
| [101] |
|
| [102] |
|
| [103] |
|
| [104] |
|
Northeast Forestry University
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |