4.7 Article

Differences in rhizosphere carbon-partitioning among plant species of different families

期刊

PLANT AND SOIL
卷 256, 期 2, 页码 347-357

出版社

KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBL
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026147622800

关键词

(CO2)-C-14 plant labelling; life cycle; plant family; rhizosphere respiration; root exudation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interspecific variations in carbon ( C) allocation and partitioning in the rhizosphere were investigated on 12 Mediterranean species belonging to different family groups ( grasses, legumes, non-legume forbs) and having different life cycles. Plants grown individually in artificial soil, in a greenhouse and inoculated with rhizosphere microflora were labelled with (CO2)-C-14 for 3 h at the vegetative stage. Rhizosphere respiration was measured during 6 days after which labelled C partitioning between shoots, roots, soil, root washing solution and respiration was estimated. The percentage of assimilated C-14 allocated below ground differed significantly between species ( 41 - 76%) but no significant difference was found between grasses, legumes and non-legume forbs. When expressed as percentage of below-ground C-14, rhizosphere respiration was significantly smaller for non-legume forbs (42%) than for grasses (46%) and legumes (51%). Consequently more C-14 was incorporated into root biomass in the former. Half-life of (CO2)-C-14 evolution through respiration ranged from 23 h in legumes to 27 h for non-legume forbs and 37 h for grasses. This suggested differences in microbial activities due to quantities and quality of root exuded C. Rhizosphere respiration was positively correlated with the amount of C-14 in the solution used to wash the roots on one hand, and root N concentration on the other hand. This led to a functional hierarchy between plant family groups of the overall rhizosphere activity.. It went from non-legume forbs being the less active ( except Crepis sancta) in terms of respiration and exudation, to grasses and then legumes, the most active but also the richest in nitrogen.

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