4.7 Article

Effects of enhanced nitrogen deposition on foliar chemistry and physiological processes of forest trees at the Bear Brook Watershed in Maine

Journal

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 221, Issue 1-3, Pages 207-214

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.09.022

Keywords

base cation depletion; gas exchange; photosynthesis; soil acidification

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Effects of enhanced nitrogen deposition on nutrient foliar concentrations and net photosynthesis of sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.), American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh) and red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) were evaluated at the Bear Brook Watershed in Maine (BBWM). The BBWM is a paired-watershed forest ecosystem study with one watershed treated since 1989 with bimonthly dry ammonium sulfate ((NH4)(2)SO4) additions at a rate of 25.2 kg N ha(-1) year(-1), while the other watershed serves as a reference. The (NH4)(2)SO4 treatment resulted in significant increases in foliar N concentrations for all three species and significant reductions in foliar Ca, Mg and Zn concentrations for American beech and red spruce. Treatment effects on foliar concentrations of other nutrients were not significant in any species. Despite higher N concentrations in all species, only treated sugar maple showed significantly higher photosynthetic rates. The non-response in net photosynthesis to higher foliar N in American beech and red spruce might be attributed to their low foliar Ca and/or Mg concentrations. Higher net photosynthetic rates in sugar maple might be explained by the higher foliar N and by the ability of this species to maintain an adequate Ca and Mg supply. Results suggested that nutrient imbalances due to inadequate supply of Ca and Mg might have counteracted a potential increase in net photosynthesis induced by higher N concentrations in American beech and red spruce. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available