4.5 Article

Influence of earthworm invasion on redistribution and retention of soil carbon and nitrogen in northern temperate forests

期刊

ECOSYSTEMS
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 13-27

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10021-003-0127-y

关键词

biological invasions; soil organic matter; stable isotopes; soil solution nitrogen; carbon; forest ecosystems

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We analyzed soil organic matter distribution and soil solution chemistry in plots with and without earthworms at two sugar maple (Acer saccharum)-dominated forests in New York State, USA, with differing land-use histories to assess the influence of earthworm invasion on the retention or loss of soil carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) in northern temperate forests. Our objectives were to assess the influence of exotic earthworm invasion on (a) the amount and depth distribution of soil C and N, (b) Soil delta(13)C and delta(15)N, and (c) soil solution chemistry and leaching of C and N in forests with different land-use histories. At a relatively undisturbed forest site (Arnot Forest), earthworms eliminated the thick forest floor, decreased soil C storage in the upper 12 cm by 28%, and reduced soil C:N ratios from 19.2 to 15.3. At a previously cultivated forest site with little forest floor (Tompkins Farm), earthworms did not influence the storage of soil C or N or soil C:N ratios. Earthworms altered the stable isotopic signature of soil at Arnot Forest but not at Tompkins Farm; the alteration of stable isotopes indicated that earthworms significantly increased the loss of forest floor C but not N from the soil profile at Arnot Forest. Nitrate (NO3-) concentrations in tension and zero-tension lysimeters were much greater at Tompkins Farm than Arnot Forest, and earthworms increased NO3- leaching at Tompkins Farm. The results suggest that the effect of earthworm invasion on the distribution, retention, and solution chemistry of soil C and N in northern temperate forests may depend on the initial quantity and quality of soil organic matter at invaded sites.

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