4.5 Article

Nitrogen and phosphorus resorption of Artemisia scoparia, Chenopodium acuminatum, Cannabis sativa, and Phragmites communis under nitrogen and phosphorus additions in a semiarid grassland, China

Journal

PLANT SOIL AND ENVIRONMENT
Volume 58, Issue 10, Pages 446-451

Publisher

CZECH ACADEMY AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.17221/6339-PSE

Keywords

litter decomposition; nitrogen limitation; nutrient availability; sandy grassland; species composition

Categories

Funding

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA05050401, KZCX2-YW-Q1-06]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30800143]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A factorial nitrogen (N) x phosphorus (P) addition experiment was conducted to evaluate responses of leaf nutrient resorption to increased soil N and P availability in a semiarid grassland in Keerqin Sandy Lands, China. Four plant species were selected, among which Artemisia scoparia and Chenopodium acuminatum were dominant species in the control and P-added plots, and Cannabis sativa and Phragmites communis were dominant in the N- and N + P-treated plots. Results showed that N and P resorption varied substantially among species (P < 0.01). A general trend of decrease in N resorption efficiency (NRE) and N resorption proficiency (NRP) was observed in response to increased soil N availability for all species, except P. communis only for NRE. Similarly, P resorption proficiency (PRP) decreased in response to P addition for all species, whereas P resorption efficiency (PRE) was not affected by P addition. Species responded differently in terms of PRE and PRP to N addition, whereas no changes in NRE and NRP occurred in response to P addition except P. communis for NRE. Our results suggest that increased soil nutrient availability can influence plant-mediated nutrient cycling directly by changing leaf nutrient resorption and indirectly by altering species composition in the sandy grassland.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available