4.8 Article

Effects of temperature and fertilization on nitrogen cycling and community composition of an urban lawn

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
卷 14, 期 9, 页码 2119-2131

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01617.x

关键词

C-3 and C-4; C-4 weeds; crabgrass; fescue; nitrous oxide; turfgrass; warming

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We examined the influence of temperature and management practices on the nitrogen (N) cycling of turfgrass, the largest irrigated crop in the United States. We measured nitrous oxide (N2O) fluxes, and plant and soil N content and isotopic composition with a manipulative experiment of temperature and fertilizer application. Infrared lamps were used to increase surface temperature by 3.5 +/- 1.3 degrees C on average and control and heated plots were split into high and low fertilizer treatments. The N2O fluxes increased following fertilizer application and were also directly related to soil moisture. There was a positive effect of warming on N2O fluxes. Soils in the heated plots were enriched in nitrogen isotope ratio (delta N-15) relative to control plots, consistent with greater gaseous losses of N. For all treatments, C-4 plant C/N ratio was negatively correlated with plant delta N-15, suggesting that low leaf N was associated with the use of isotopically depleted N sources such as mineralized organic matter. A significant and unexpected result was a large, rapid increase in the proportion of C-4 plants in the heated plots relative to control plots, as measured by the carbon isotope ratio (delta C-13) of total harvested aboveground biomass. The C-4 plant biomass was dominated by crabgrass, a common weed in C-3 fescue lawns. Our results suggest that an increase in temperature caused by climate change as well as the urban heat island effect may result in increases in N2O emissions from fertilized urban lawns. In addition, warming may exacerbate weed invasions, which may require more intensive management, e.g. herbicide application, to manage species composition.

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

4.8
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