IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0191952.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of understory vegetation on soil carbon and nitrogen dynamic in aerially seeded Pinus massoniana plantations

Author

Listed:
  • Ping Pan
  • Fang Zhao
  • Jinkui Ning
  • Ling Zhang
  • Xunzhi Ouyang
  • Hao Zang

Abstract

Understory vegetation plays a vital role in regulating soil carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) characteristics due to differences in plant functional traits. Different understory vegetation types have been reported following aerial seeding. While aerial seeding is common in areas with serious soil erosion, few studies have been conducted to investigate changes in soil C and N cycling as affected by understory vegetation in aerially seeded plantations. Here, we studied soil C and N characteristics under two naturally formed understory vegetation types (Dicranopteris and graminoid) in aerially seeded Pinus massoniana Lamb plantations. Across the two studied understory vegetation types, soil organic C was significantly correlated with all measured soil N variables, including total N, available N, microbial biomass N and water-soluble organic N, while microbial biomass C was correlated with all measured variables except soil organic C. Dicranopteris and graminoid differed in their effects on soil C and N process. Except water-soluble organic C, all the other C and N variables were higher in soils with graminoids. The higher levels of soil organic C, microbial biomass C, total N, available N, microbial biomass N and water-soluble organic N were consistent with the higher litter and root quality (C/N) of graminoid vegetation compared to Dicranopteris. Changes in soil C and N cycles might be impacted by understory vegetation types via differences in litter or root quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Pan & Fang Zhao & Jinkui Ning & Ling Zhang & Xunzhi Ouyang & Hao Zang, 2018. "Impact of understory vegetation on soil carbon and nitrogen dynamic in aerially seeded Pinus massoniana plantations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0191952
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0191952
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0191952&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0191952?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter B. Reich & Sarah E. Hobbie & Tali Lee & David S. Ellsworth & Jason B. West & David Tilman & Johannes M. H. Knops & Shahid Naeem & Jared Trost, 2006. "Nitrogen limitation constrains sustainability of ecosystem response to CO2," Nature, Nature, vol. 440(7086), pages 922-925, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leilei Ding & Puchang Wang & Wen Zhang & Yu Zhang & Shige Li & Xin Wei & Xi Chen & Yujun Zhang & Fuli Yang, 2019. "Shrub Encroachment Shapes Soil Nutrient Concentration, Stoichiometry and Carbon Storage in an Abandoned Subalpine Grassland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chao Xu & Teng-Chiu Lin & Jr-Chuan Huang & Zhijie Yang & Xiaofei Liu & Decheng Xiong & Shidong Chen & Minhuang Wang & Liuming Yang & Yusheng Yang, 2022. "Microbial Biomass Is More Important than Runoff Export in Predicting Soil Inorganic Nitrogen Concentrations Following Forest Conversion in Subtropical China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Diriba Shiferaw G., 2017. "Water-Nutrients Interaction: Exploring the Effects of Water as a Central Role for Availability & Use Efficiency of Nutrients by Shallow Rooted Vegetable Crops - A Review," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(10), pages 78-93, 10-2017.
    3. Tong Qiu & Robert Andrus & Marie-Claire Aravena & Davide Ascoli & Yves Bergeron & Roberta Berretti & Daniel Berveiller & Michal Bogdziewicz & Thomas Boivin & Raul Bonal & Don C. Bragg & Thomas Caignar, 2022. "Limits to reproduction and seed size-number trade-offs that shape forest dominance and future recovery," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. L. Jackson & S. Wheeler & A. Hollander & A. O’Geen & B. Orlove & J. Six & D. Sumner & F. Santos-Martin & J. Kramer & W. Horwath & R. Howitt & T. Tomich, 2011. "Case study on potential agricultural responses to climate change in a California landscape," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 407-427, December.
    5. Zhiwei Cao & Xi Fang & Wenhua Xiang & Pifeng Lei & Changhui Peng, 2020. "The Vertical Differences in the Change Rates and Controlling Factors of Soil Organic Carbon and Total Nitrogen along Vegetation Restoration in a Subtropical Area of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Verena Seufert & Gustaf Granath & Christoph Müller, 2019. "A meta-analysis of crop response patterns to nitrogen limitation for improved model representation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, October.
    7. Eric C. Brevik, 2013. "The Potential Impact of Climate Change on Soil Properties and Processes and Corresponding Influence on Food Security," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Alexandru Milcu & Martin Lukac & Phil Ineson, 2012. "The role of closed ecological systems in carbon cycle modelling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 709-716, June.
    9. Li, Xiran & Zhu, Zaichun & Zeng, Hui & Piao, Shilong, 2016. "Estimation of gross primary production in China (1982–2010) with multiple ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 324(C), pages 33-44.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0191952. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.