4.7 Article

Fertilization, soil and plant community characteristics determine soil microbial activity in managed temperate grasslands

期刊

PLANT AND SOIL
卷 419, 期 1-2, 页码 189-199

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-017-3328-4

关键词

Above- and belowground interactions; Microbial basal respiration; Biodiversity; Ecosystem functioning; Microbial biomass carbon; Soil characteristics

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [RO/2397-6]
  2. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig - German Research Foundation [FZT 118]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies in experimental grasslands indicated that declining plant species diversity negatively affects soil microbial communities. Here, we assessed if plant diversity effects also occur in real-world grasslands. We studied the influence of fertilization, soil, and plant community characteristics on soil microbial activity (microbial biomass carbon, basal respiration) in 12 managed temperate grasslands of varying plant species richness in two subsequent years. The most important variable explaining variation in microbial activity was soil water content, while positive effects of other soil characteristics (organic carbon and nitrogen concentrations) and fertilization became more important in one study year with generally moister soil conditions. Under moister conditions, fertilization also indirectly influenced soil microbial biomass C via negative effects on plant species richness, which itself increased soil microbial biomass C. Our results show that variation in soil microbial activity in managed grasslands involves direct effects of fertilization as well as indirect effects through changes in plant diversity and the amount of carbon and nitrogen stored in plants and soil. These results emphasize that increased nutrient inputs in grasslands entail complex changes in ecosystem processes and indicate that mechanisms driving soil microbial activity in experimental grasslands also apply to real-world grasslands.

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