Soil carbon pools are affected by species identity and productivity in a tree common garden experiment

The formation and turnover of soil organic carbon (C), the largest terrestrial C pool, is strongly impacted by the ultimate source of that C: leaves, wood, roots, and root exudates. The quantity and quality of these inputs is determined by the identity of the plants involved. Yet substantial uncertainty surrounds the complex relationships among plant traits and soil C, precluding efforts to maximize whole-ecosystem C uptake in nature-based climate mitigation scenarios. In this study, we leveraged a biodiversity-ecosystem function experiment with trees (IDENT) to explore the effects of interspecific variation in plant traits on soil C dynamics in the very early stages of stand development (9 years since planting). Mineral soil C stocks to 5 cm depth were quantified in monospecific plots of 19 tree species planted on a former agricultural field, and analyzed in relation to tree growth and functional traits. We found that tree species identity affected soil bulk density and, to a lesser extent, the carbon content of the topsoil, and thereby total C pools. Among species and across plots, mineral soil C stocks were positively correlated with rates of tree growth and were significantly larger beneath broadleaf trees with “fast” functional traits vs. conifers with more conservative leaf traits, when comparisons were made over equivalent soil depth increments. Thus, plant functional traits mediate interspecific differences in productivity, which in turn influence the magnitude of belowground C stocks. These results highlight important linkages between above- and belowground carbon cycles in the earliest stages of afforestation.

[1]  H. Matthews,et al.  Temporary nature-based carbon removal can lower peak warming in a well-below 2 °C scenario , 2022, Communications Earth & Environment.

[2]  S. Frey,et al.  Fast-decaying plant litter enhances soil carbon in temperate forests but not through microbial physiological traits , 2022, Nature Communications.

[3]  H. Matthews,et al.  Temporary Nature-based Carbon Removal Can Lower Peak Warming in a Well-below 2°C Scenario , 2021 .

[4]  E. Noellemeyer,et al.  Afforestation With Different Tree Species Causes a Divergent Evolution of Soil Profiles and Properties , 2021, Frontiers in Forests and Global Change.

[5]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  A trade-off between plant and soil carbon storage under elevated CO2 , 2021, Nature.

[6]  John A. Stanturf,et al.  Tamm Review: Influence of forest management activities on soil organic carbon stocks: A knowledge synthesis , 2020, Forest Ecology and Management.

[7]  Kirsty J. Park,et al.  Woodland restoration on agricultural land: long‐term impacts on soil quality , 2019, Restoration Ecology.

[8]  D. Russell,et al.  Effects of earthworms on bulk density: A meta‐analysis , 2019, European Journal of Soil Science.

[9]  C. Messier,et al.  Evergreenness influences fine root growth more than tree diversity in a common garden experiment , 2019, Oecologia.

[10]  Sara E. Kuebbing,et al.  Evidence for the primacy of living root inputs, not root or shoot litter, in forming soil organic carbon. , 2018, The New phytologist.

[11]  K. Lajtha Nutrient retention and loss during ecosystem succession: revisiting a classic model. , 2019, Ecology.

[12]  K. Nadelhoffer,et al.  The detrital input and removal treatment (DIRT) network: Insights into soil carbon stabilization. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  Benjamin L Turner,et al.  Decadal-scale litter manipulation alters the biochemical and physical character of tropical forest soil carbon , 2018, Soil Biology and Biochemistry.

[14]  Benjamin L Turner,et al.  Tree mycorrhizal type predicts within‐site variability in the storage and distribution of soil organic matter , 2018, Global change biology.

[15]  P. Ciais,et al.  Impact of priming on global soil carbon stocks , 2018, Global change biology.

[16]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  The Ecology of Soil Carbon: Pools, Vulnerabilities, and Biotic and Abiotic Controls , 2017 .

[17]  W. R. Whalley,et al.  The emergent rhizosphere: imaging the development of the porous architecture at the root-soil interface , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[18]  Pete Smith,et al.  Natural climate solutions , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  E. Shevliakova,et al.  Feedbacks between plant N demand and rhizosphere priming depend on type of mycorrhizal association. , 2017, Ecology letters.

[20]  J. Jastrow,et al.  The importance of anabolism in microbial control over soil carbon storage , 2017, Nature Microbiology.

[21]  P. Reich,et al.  Partitioning the effect of composition and diversity of tree communities on leaf litter decomposition and soil respiration , 2017 .

[22]  A. Weiskittel,et al.  Assessing the factors influencing natural regeneration patterns in the diverse, multi-cohort, and managed forests of Maine, USA , 2016 .

[23]  C. Hawkes,et al.  Ectomycorrhizal fungi slow soil carbon cycling. , 2016, Ecology letters.

[24]  W. K. Moser,et al.  Effects of afforestation on soil structure formation in two climatic regions of the Czech Republic , 2016 .

[25]  E. Paul,et al.  Dual, differential isotope labeling shows the preferential movement of labile plant constituents into mineral‐bonded soil organic matter , 2016, Global change biology.

[26]  P. Kennedy,et al.  Revisiting the 'Gadgil effect': do interguild fungal interactions control carbon cycling in forest soils? , 2016, The New phytologist.

[27]  W. Parton,et al.  Formation of soil organic matter via biochemical and physical pathways of litter mass loss , 2015 .

[28]  K. Barry,et al.  Pervasive and strong effects of plants on soil chemistry: a meta-analysis of individual plant ‘Zinke’ effects , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[29]  D. Dragoni,et al.  Mycorrhizal type determines the magnitude and direction of root-induced changes in decomposition in a temperate forest. , 2015, The New phytologist.

[30]  Yiqi Luo,et al.  Faster Decomposition Under Increased Atmospheric CO2 Limits Soil Carbon Storage , 2014, Science.

[31]  K. Nadelhoffer,et al.  Changes to particulate versus mineral-associated soil carbon after 50 years of litter manipulation in forest and prairie experimental ecosystems , 2014, Biogeochemistry.

[32]  P. Reich The world‐wide ‘fast–slow’ plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto , 2014 .

[33]  Benjamin L Turner,et al.  Mycorrhiza-mediated competition between plants and decomposers drives soil carbon storage , 2014, Nature.

[34]  P. Reich,et al.  Advancing biodiversity–ecosystem functioning science using high-density tree-based experiments over functional diversity gradients , 2013, Oecologia.

[35]  L. Vesterdal,et al.  Do tree species influence soil carbon stocks in temperate and boreal forests , 2013 .

[36]  I. Schmidt,et al.  Soil carbon accumulation and nitrogen retention traits of four tree species grown in common gardens , 2013 .

[37]  Shan Xu,et al.  Variability of above-ground litter inputs alters soil physicochemical and biological processes: a meta-analysis of litterfall-manipulation experiments , 2013 .

[38]  Christopher W. Swanston,et al.  Afforestation Effects on Soil Carbon Storage in the United States: A Synthesis , 2013 .

[39]  K. Denef,et al.  The Microbial Efficiency‐Matrix Stabilization (MEMS) framework integrates plant litter decomposition with soil organic matter stabilization: do labile plant inputs form stable soil organic matter? , 2013, Global change biology.

[40]  P. Kardol,et al.  Biotic plant–soil feedbacks across temporal scales , 2013 .

[41]  Katherine N. Suding,et al.  Plant–soil feedbacks: the past, the present and future challenges , 2013 .

[42]  M. Bradford,et al.  Empirical evidence that soil carbon formation from plant inputs is positively related to microbial growth , 2013, Biogeochemistry.

[43]  Shuijin Hu,et al.  Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Increase Organic Carbon Decomposition Under Elevated CO2 , 2012, Science.

[44]  Yves Rosseel,et al.  lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling , 2012 .

[45]  P. Reich,et al.  Tree species effects on coupled cycles of carbon, nitrogen, and acidity in mineral soils at a common garden experiment , 2012, Biogeochemistry.

[46]  M. Turpault,et al.  Impact of common European tree species on the chemical and physicochemical properties of fine earth: an unusual pattern , 2010 .

[47]  David Paré,et al.  Carbon accumulation in agricultural soils after afforestation: a meta‐analysis , 2010 .

[48]  Y. Kuzyakov,et al.  Mechanisms of real and apparent priming effects and their dependence on soil microbial biomass and community structure: critical review , 2008, Biology and Fertility of Soils.

[49]  J. Cornelissen,et al.  Plant functional traits and soil carbon sequestration in contrasting biomes. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[50]  P. Reich,et al.  Linking litter calcium, earthworms and soil properties: a common garden test with 14 tree species , 2005 .

[51]  Keryn I. Paul,et al.  Change in soil carbon following afforestation , 2002 .

[52]  John C. Brissette,et al.  Precommercial thinning in a northern conifer stand: 18-year results , 1999 .

[53]  S. Trumbore,et al.  Rapid accumulation and turnover of soil carbon in a re-establishing forest , 1999, Nature.

[54]  Christian P. Giardina,et al.  Why do Tree Species Affect Soils? The Warp and Woof of Tree-soil Interactions , 1998 .

[55]  J. Brissette Effects of intensity and frequency of harvesting on abundance, stocking and composition of natural regeneration in the Acadian forest of eastern North America. , 1996 .

[56]  P. Gadgil,et al.  Mycorrhiza and Litter Decomposition , 1971, Nature.