Whether in life or in death: fresh perspectives on how plants affect biogeochemical cycling

Summary Plants have numerous impacts on biogeochemical cycling across both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. These effects extend well beyond the critical role of carbon (C) fixation through photosynthesis that provides the basis for ecosystem energy flow. While foliar and root traits of senescent plant material (litter) have been explored in detail in terrestrial ecosystems, there is a resurgence of interest in how plants modulate biogeochemical cycling in ways other than litter quality effects on C and nutrient mineralization. This Special Feature represents a collection of ‘fresh’ perspectives on how plants alone, or in interaction with other organisms, have important and lasting impacts on biogeochemical cycles of C and nutrients in a range of terrestrial and aquatic environments. We begin in the open ocean and then peer from the forest edge before moving into forest understoreys and grasslands to examine the control by live terrestrial plants on ecosystem C and nutrient cycling. Plants directly affect biogeochemical cycling while living through their diversity and composition, nutrient capture and strategies for assimilating C, and by altering the microclimate for decomposition. In addition, how they construct their tissues and alter the abiotic environment has large impacts on the turnover of C and nutrients once plants have senesced or died. From the direct impact of plants, we move onto the influence of plant–insect interactions, which effectively determine changes in plant stoichiometry in grasslands of varying diversity. Finally, looking directly in the soil, it is clear that plant–mycorrhizae interactions are important in modulating the response of litter decomposition to nutrient addition and the nature of C metabolism in the soil. Synthesis. The papers here highlight careful matching between how plants live and their biotic and abiotic contexts. Taken together, it appears that the dynamic, rather than passive, nature of plant responses to variable environments is key in affecting ecosystem level processes of C and nutrient turnover. This Special Feature highlights a diversity of connections between plants and their environment and demonstrates that in both life and death, how plants respond to these changes differs among plant lineages and this diversity will play a central role in determining biogeochemical cycling in the future in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.

[1]  Todd E. Dawson,et al.  Foliar water uptake: a common water acquisition strategy for plants of the redwood forest , 2009, Oecologia.

[2]  I. C. Prentice,et al.  Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model , 2003 .

[3]  Robert Eugene Blankenship Early Evolution of Photosynthesis1 , 2010, Plant Physiology.

[4]  G. Bonan Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests , 2008, Science.

[5]  J. R. King,et al.  Climate fails to predict wood decomposition at regional scales , 2014 .

[6]  S. Allison,et al.  Plant traits and wood fates across the globe: rotted, burned, or consumed? , 2009 .

[7]  S. Hobbie Plant species effects on nutrient cycling: revisiting litter feedbacks. , 2015, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[8]  Richard P Phillips,et al.  Decay rates of leaf litters from arbuscular mycorrhizal trees are more sensitive to soil effects than litters from ectomycorrhizal trees , 2015 .

[9]  Corinne Le Quéré,et al.  Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis , 2013 .

[10]  S. Sistla,et al.  Stoichiometric flexibility as a regulator of carbon and nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems under change. , 2012, The New phytologist.

[11]  M. V. D. van der Heijden,et al.  Socialism in soil? The importance of mycorrhizal fungal networks for facilitation in natural ecosystems , 2009 .

[12]  Sandra Díaz,et al.  Plant species traits are the predominant control on litter decomposition rates within biomes worldwide. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[13]  Jessica A. M. Moore,et al.  Interactions among roots, mycorrhizas and free‐living microbial communities differentially impact soil carbon processes , 2015 .

[14]  J. Ehleringer,et al.  Carbon Isotope Discrimination and Photosynthesis , 1989 .

[15]  C. Parmesan Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change , 2006 .

[16]  A. Austin Has water limited our imagination for aridland biogeochemistry? , 2011, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  A. M. Johnston,et al.  Discrimination between12C and13C by marine plants , 1992, Oecologia.

[18]  Eric Garnier,et al.  Co-variations in litter decomposition, leaf traits and plant growth in species from a Mediterranean old-field succession , 2006 .

[19]  J. Randerson,et al.  Primary production of the biosphere: integrating terrestrial and oceanic components , 1998, Science.

[20]  Roberta E. Martin,et al.  Amazonian functional diversity from forest canopy chemical assembly , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  E. Borer,et al.  Food‐web composition and plant diversity control foliar nutrient content and stoichiometry , 2015 .

[22]  Mark C. Brundrett,et al.  Coevolution of roots and mycorrhizas of land plants. , 2002, The New phytologist.

[23]  K. Weathers,et al.  Fog as a source of nitrogen for redwood trees: evidence from fluxes and stable isotopes , 2015 .

[24]  C. C. Stepien Impacts of geography, taxonomy and functional group on inorganic carbon use patterns in marine macrophytes , 2015 .

[25]  A. Austin,et al.  A shady business: pine afforestation alters the primary controls on litter decomposition along a precipitation gradient in Patagonia, Argentina , 2015 .

[26]  W. M. Post,et al.  Soil carbon sequestration and land‐use change: processes and potential , 2000 .

[27]  P. Falkowski,et al.  Biogeochemical Controls and Feedbacks on Ocean Primary Production , 1998, Science.

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

[29]  C. Ballaré,et al.  Plant interactions with other organisms: molecules, ecology and evolution. , 2014, The New phytologist.

[30]  J. Hanspach,et al.  Climate and land use change impacts on plant distributions in Germany , 2008, Biology Letters.

[31]  J. Chave,et al.  Towards a Worldwide Wood Economics Spectrum 2 . L E a D I N G D I M E N S I O N S I N W O O D F U N C T I O N , 2022 .

[32]  Mridul K. Thomas,et al.  Global biogeochemical impacts of phytoplankton: a trait‐based perspective , 2015 .

[33]  A. Zanne,et al.  A deteriorating state of affairs: How endogenous and exogenous factors determine plant decay rates , 2015 .

[34]  P. Reich,et al.  Global relationship of wood and leaf litter decomposability: the role of functional traits within and across plant organs , 2014 .

[35]  Joshua P. Schimel,et al.  Microbial control over carbon cycling in soil , 2012, Front. Microbio..

[36]  F. Chapin,et al.  Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology , 2002, Springer New York.