PngLambersKardolEtAl2019

Reference

Png, G.K., Lambers, H., Kardol, P., Turner, B.L., Wardle, D.A., Lalibertée, E. (2019) Biotic and abiotic plant–soil feedback depends on nitrogen-acquisition strategy and shifts during long-term ecosystem development. Journal of Ecology, 107(1):142-153. (Scopus )

Abstract

Feedback between plants and soil is an important driver of plant community structure, but it remains unclear whether plant–soil feedback (PSF): (i) reflects changes in biotic or abiotic properties, (ii) depends on environmental context in terms of soil nutrient availability, and (iii) varies among plant functional groups. As soil nutrient availability strongly affects plant distribution and performance, soil chemical properties and plant nutrient-acquisition strategies might serve as important drivers of PSF. We used soils from young and old stages of a long-term soil chronosequence to represent sites where productivity is limited by nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability, respectively. We grew three N-fixing and three non-N-fixing plant species in soils conditioned by co-occurring conspecific or heterospecific species from each of these two stages. In addition, three soil treatments were used to distinguish biotic and abiotic effects on plant performance, allowing measurements of overall, biotic, and abiotic PSF. In young, N-poor soils, non-N-fixing plants grew better in soils from N-fixing plants than in their own soils (i.e., negative PSF). However, this difference was not only associated with improved abiotic conditions in soils from N-fixing plants but also with changes in soil biota. By contrast, no significant PSF was observed for N-fixing plants grown in young soils. Moreover, we did not observe any significant PSF for either N-fixing or non-N-fixing plants growing in old, P-impoverished soils. Synthesis. The direction and strength of plant-soil feedback (PSF) varied among N-acquisition strategies and soils differing in nutrient availability, with stronger plant-soil feedback in younger, N-poor soils compared to older, P-impoverished soils. Our results highlight the importance of considering soil nutrient availability, plant-mediated abiotic and biotic soil properties, and plant nutrient-acquisition strategies when studying plant-soil feedback, thereby advancing our mechanistic understanding of plant-soil feedback during long-term ecosystem development. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society

EndNote Format

You can import this reference in EndNote.

BibTeX-CSV Format

You can import this reference in BibTeX-CSV format.

BibTeX Format

You can copy the BibTeX entry of this reference below, orimport it directly in a software like JabRef .

@ARTICLE { PngLambersKardolEtAl2019,
    AUTHOR = { Png, G.K. and Lambers, H. and Kardol, P. and Turner, B.L. and Wardle, D.A. and Lalibertée, E. },
    JOURNAL = { Journal of Ecology },
    TITLE = { Biotic and abiotic plant–soil feedback depends on nitrogen-acquisition strategy and shifts during long-term ecosystem development },
    YEAR = { 2019 },
    NOTE = { cited By 5 },
    NUMBER = { 1 },
    PAGES = { 142-153 },
    VOLUME = { 107 },
    ABSTRACT = { Feedback between plants and soil is an important driver of plant community structure, but it remains unclear whether plant–soil feedback (PSF): (i) reflects changes in biotic or abiotic properties, (ii) depends on environmental context in terms of soil nutrient availability, and (iii) varies among plant functional groups. As soil nutrient availability strongly affects plant distribution and performance, soil chemical properties and plant nutrient-acquisition strategies might serve as important drivers of PSF. We used soils from young and old stages of a long-term soil chronosequence to represent sites where productivity is limited by nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability, respectively. We grew three N-fixing and three non-N-fixing plant species in soils conditioned by co-occurring conspecific or heterospecific species from each of these two stages. In addition, three soil treatments were used to distinguish biotic and abiotic effects on plant performance, allowing measurements of overall, biotic, and abiotic PSF. In young, N-poor soils, non-N-fixing plants grew better in soils from N-fixing plants than in their own soils (i.e., negative PSF). However, this difference was not only associated with improved abiotic conditions in soils from N-fixing plants but also with changes in soil biota. By contrast, no significant PSF was observed for N-fixing plants grown in young soils. Moreover, we did not observe any significant PSF for either N-fixing or non-N-fixing plants growing in old, P-impoverished soils. Synthesis. The direction and strength of plant-soil feedback (PSF) varied among N-acquisition strategies and soils differing in nutrient availability, with stronger plant-soil feedback in younger, N-poor soils compared to older, P-impoverished soils. Our results highlight the importance of considering soil nutrient availability, plant-mediated abiotic and biotic soil properties, and plant nutrient-acquisition strategies when studying plant-soil feedback, thereby advancing our mechanistic understanding of plant-soil feedback during long-term ecosystem development. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society },
    AFFILIATION = { School of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley (Perth), WA, Australia; Soil and Ecosystem Ecology Laboratory, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; Department of Forest Ecology and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden; Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Ancon, Panama; Asian School of the Environment, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Centre sur la Biodiversité, Institut de Recherche en Biologie Végétale, Département de Sciences Biologiques, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada },
    AUTHOR_KEYWORDS = { chronosequence; ecosystem retrogression; Fabaceae; long-term ecosystem development; nutrient-acquisition strategies; plant functional traits; plant–soil (below-ground) interactions; plant–soil feedback },
    DOCUMENT_TYPE = { Article },
    DOI = { 10.1111/1365-2745.13048 },
    SOURCE = { Scopus },
    URL = { https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85052522978&doi=10.1111%2f1365-2745.13048&partnerID=40&md5=47397be374c50e3055190e6952d3c932 },
}

********************************************************** *************************** FRQNT ************************ **********************************************************

Un regroupement stratégique du

********************************************************** *********************** Infolettre *********************** **********************************************************

Abonnez-vous à
l'Infolettre du CEF!

********************************************************** ***************** Pub - Congrès Mycelium ****************** **********************************************************

Reporté en 2021

********************************************************** ***************** Pub - IWTT ****************** **********************************************************

Reporté en 2021

**********************************************************

***************** Pub - Symphonies_Boreales ****************** **********************************************************

********************************************************** ***************** Boîte à trucs *************** **********************************************************

CEF-Référence
La référence vedette !

Jérémie Alluard (2016) Les statistiques au moments de la rédaction 

  • Ce document a pour but de guider les étudiants à intégrer de manière appropriée une analyse statistique dans leur rapport de recherche.

Voir les autres...