4.7 Article

Divergent coupling mechanism of precipitation on plant community multifunction across alpine grassland on the Tibetan Plateau

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1122140

关键词

alpine meadow; alpine steppe; community-weighted mean trait; ecological stoichiometry; leaf functional traits; transect

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on the investigation of plant adaptive strategies across the Tibetan Plateau, it was found that plant functional traits increased with elevation, and the control of these traits was more stable in alpine meadows compared to alpine steppes.
IntroductionIt is essential to understand plant adaptive strategies on plant stoichiometric traits at the species level rather than at the community level under various environmental conditions across the Tibetan Plateau (TP). MethodsHere, plant community function and edaphic and meteorological factors were collected at 111 sites along an extensive water-heat gradient during the peak growing season in 2015. Community-weighted mean trait (CWM) was introduced to illuminating dynamics of the functional trait at the community level. ResultsOur results indicated that plant functional traits, including CWM-leaf total carbon (CWM_LTC), CWM-leaf total nitrogen (CWM_LTN), and CWM-leaf total phosphorus (CWM_LTP), showed similar and comparatively marked increases from alpine meadow (AM) to alpine steppe (AS). Moreover, since the tightly coordinated variation among each plant functional trait of AM was higher than that of AS, a more stable coupling mechanism of these plant functional traits could be observed in AM under a long-term evolutionary habit. Specifically, there was higher annual mean precipitation (AMP) in AM than that in AS significantly (P < 0.01), and AMP was significantly correlated with soil moisture and soil total phosphorus in AM. Generally, our findings suggest that precipitation determines divergent coupling plant community function in both AS and AM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据