4.3 Article

Reciprocal interactions between plants and soil in an upland grassland

Journal

ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 93-98

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1007/s11284-008-0485-1

Keywords

Plant traits; Soil fertility; Plant/soil feedback

Categories

Funding

  1. Research Study Leave
  2. NSERC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Through the production of litter, plants with different life history strategies are predicted to both affect and be affected by the properties of soil. Competitive species are expected to increase the fertility of, and have a positive growth feedback with, soil, whereas stress-tolerant species should decrease fertility but show no growth feedback. We maintained monocultures of competitive (Lolium perenne and Agrostis capillaris) and stress-tolerant (Festuca ovina and Nardus stricta) grasses on an unproductive grassland for six years. The Nardus soil developed significantly greater inorganic nitrogen than the Agrostis and Festuca soil, and significantly greater soil moisture content than the Festuca soil. However, there were no differences in organic matter content, phosphate or bulk density between the soil types. In a greenhouse assay, each species was grown in soil cores from the different monocultures as well as natural turf. There were significant differences in growth between plant species and soil types. As expected, L. perenne produced the greatest amount of biomass. However, plants grown on Nardus soil were twice as large and had a 21% lower root allocation than plants grown on any of the other soil types. Lolium perenne, A. capillaris and F. ovina had significant negative growth feedbacks with their own soil (-0.460, -0.821 and -0.792, respectively) and N. stricta had a significant positive feedback (0.560). This study highlights the difficulties of predicting how plant traits will affect soil properties.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available