3.9 Article

Breakdown of leaf litter in a neotropical stream

期刊

出版社

NORTH AMER BENTHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.2307/1468477

关键词

tropical; decomposition; macroinvertebrates; shredders; aquatic hyphomycetes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the breakdown of 2 leaf species, Croton gossypifolius (Euphorbiaceae) and Clidemia sp. (Melastomataceae), in a 4th-order neotropical stream (Andean Mountains, southwestern Colombia) using leaf bags over a 6-wk period. We determined the initial leaf chemical composition and followed the change in content of organic matter, C, N, and ergosterol, the sporulation activity of aquatic hyphomycetes, and the structure and composition of leaf-associated aquatic hyphomycetes and macroinvertebrates. Both leaf species decomposed rapidly (k = 0.0651 and 0.0235/d, respectively); Croton lost 95% of its initial mass within 4 wk compared to 54% for Clidemia. These high rates were probably related to the stable and moderately high water temperature (19degreesC), favoring strong biological activity. Up to 2300 and 1500 invertebrates per leaf bag were found on Croton and Clidemia leaves after 10 and 16 cl, respectively. Shredders accounted for <5% of the total numbers and biomass. Fungal biomass peaked at 8.4 and 9.6% of the detrital mass of the 2 leaf species, suggesting that fungi contributed considerably to leaf mass loss. The difference in breakdown rates between leaf species was consistent with the earlier peaks in ergosterol and sporulation rate in Croton (10 d vs 16 d in Clidemia) and the faster colonization of Croton by macroinvertebrates. The softer texture, lower tannin content, and higher N content were partly responsible for the faster breakdown of Croton leaves. The rapid breakdown of leaf litter, combined with a low influence by shredders, is in accordance with previous findings. The high fungal activity associated with rapid leaf breakdown appears to be characteristic of leaf processing in tropical streams.

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

3.9
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