4.5 Review

The unexpected versatility of plants:: organic nitrogen use and availability in terrestrial ecosystems

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 128, 期 3, 页码 305-316

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s004420100693

关键词

amino acid uptake; organic nitrogen availability; plant-microbe competition; review

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recently recognized importance of organic nitrogen (ON), particularly amino acids, to plant nutrition in many types of agricultural and natural ecosystems has raised questions about plant-microbe interactions, N availability in soils, and the ecological implications of ON use by plants in the light of climate change and N pollution. In this review we synthesize the recent work on availability and plant uptake of amino acids with classic work on ON in soils. We also discuss recent work on the use of natural abundance levels of N-15 to infer N sources for plants. Reliance on ON is widespread among plants from many ecosystems. Authors have reached this conclusion based on laboratory studies of amino acid uptake by plants in pure culture, amino acid concentrations in soils, plant uptake of isotopically labeled amino acids in the field and in plant-soil microcosms, and from plant natural abundance values of N-15. The supply of amino acids to plants is determined mainly by the action of soil proteolytic enzymes, interactions between amino acids and the soil matrix, and competition between plants and microbes. Plants generally compete for a minor fraction of the total amino acid flux, but in some cases this forms a significant N resource, especially in ecosystems where microbial biomass undergoes large seasonal fluctuations and contributes labile ON to the soil. A quantitative understanding of ON use by plants is confounded by incomplete data on partitioning of ON between plants, mycorrhizal fungi, and competing soil microbes. Further research is needed to predict the ecological implications of ON use by plants given the influence of climatic change and N pollution.

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

4.5
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