Interplay between N-form and N-dose influences ecosystem effects of N addition to boreal forest

Aims Nitrogen (N) addition effects on boreal forest ecosystem are influenced by an interplay between N-form and N-dose. We hypothesize that trees take up organic N more efficiently than inorganic N and that unwanted side-effects of organic N are smaller. We predicted that 1) the tree growth response...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Plant and soil 2018-02, Vol.423 (1/2), p.385-395
Hauptverfasser: Hedwall, Per-Ola, Gruffman, Linda, Ishida, Takahide, From, Fredrik, Lundmark, Tomas, Näsholm, Torgny, Nordin, Annika
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aims Nitrogen (N) addition effects on boreal forest ecosystem are influenced by an interplay between N-form and N-dose. We hypothesize that trees take up organic N more efficiently than inorganic N and that unwanted side-effects of organic N are smaller. We predicted that 1) the tree growth response to arginine (ARG) addition is larger than to ammonium-nitrate (AN) and, 2) understory vegetation and ectomycorrhizal (EcM) changes following ARG addition are smaller than following AN addition. Methods We investigated the effects of AN and ARG addition (50 and 150 kg N ha−1) during five years on tree growth, understory vegetation and EcM fungi in a Pinns sylvestris L. forest (c 50 years old) in northern Sweden. Results N addition increased tree growth and changed understory vegetation composition with few significant differences between AN and ARG. Differences in responses mainly occurred for the bryophyte Pleurozium schreberi which decreased more from ARG, and for EcM sporocarps, which sharply declined from AN, but not from ARG. Conclusions We found very few differences in responses between AN and ARG addition with the exception of EcM and bryophytes. These species groups have several key functions in boreal forests and the differences in responses merits further investigations.
ISSN:0032-079X
1573-5036
1573-5036
DOI:10.1007/s11104-017-3444-1