Functional leaf traits and biodiversity effects on litter decomposition in a stream

Ecology

Volumn 90, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1641-1649

  Schindler, Markus H ^a,b   Gessner, Mark O ^a,b  

^a SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Ecosystem functioning; Functional dissimilarity; Leaf traits; Litter breakdown; Stream

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; DECIDUOUS TREE; DECOMPOSITION; DETRITIVORY; ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LEAF LITTER; MICROBIAL COMMUNITY; STREAMWATER;

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; BIOREMEDIATION; GERMANY; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT LEAF; RIVER; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; TREE;

BIODEGRADATION, ENVIRONMENTAL; BIODIVERSITY; GERMANY; PLANT LEAVES; RIVERS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TREES;

EID: 67449158989     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/08-1597.1     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Balvanera, P., A. B. Pfisterer, N. Buchmann, J.-S. He, T. Nakashizuka, D. Raffaelli, and B. Schmid. 2006. Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecology Letters 9:1146-1156.
2. Boulton, A. J., and P. I. Boon. 1991. A review of methodology used to measure leaf litter decomposition in lotic environments: time to turn over an old leaf? Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42:1-43.
3. Cardinale, B. J., D. S. Srivastava, J. E. Duffy, J. P. Wright, A. L. Downing, M. Sankaran, and C. Jouseau. 2006. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. Nature 443:989-992.
4. Dang, C. K., E. Chauvet, and M. O. Gessner. 2005. Magnitude and variability of process rates in fungal diversity-litter decomposition relationships. Ecology Letters 8:1129-1137.
5. Duarte, S., C. Pascoal, F. Cassio, and F. Bärlocher. 2006. Aquatic hyphomycete diversity and identity affect leaf litter decomposition in microcosms. Oecologia 147:658-666.
6. Dudgeon, D., A. H. Arthington, M. O. Gessner, Z. I. Kawabata, D. J. Knowler, C. Lévéque, R. J. Naiman, A.-H. Prieur-Richard, D. Soto, M. L. J. Stiassny, and C. A. Sullivan. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81: 163-182.
7. Ebina, J., T. Tsutsui, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Research 17: 1721-1726.
8. Ellison, A.-M., et al. 2005. Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 3: 479-486.
9. Gartner, T. B., and Z. G. Cardon. 2004. Decomposition dynamics in mixed-species leaf litter. Oikos 104:230-246.
10. Gessner, M. O. 2005. Proximate lignin and cellulose. Pages 1641-1649 in M. A. S. Graca, F. Barlocher, and M. O. Gessner, editors. Methods to study litter decomposition: a practical guide. Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
11. Gessner, M. O., and E. Chauvet. 1994. Importance of stream microfungi in controlling breakdown rates of leaf litter. Ecology 75:1807-1817.
12. Gessner, M. O., E. Chauvet, and M. Dobson. 1999. A perspective on leaf litter breakdown in streams. Oikos 85: 377-384.
13. Graça, M. A. S. 2001. The role of invertebrates on leaf litter decomposition in streams - a review. International Review of Hydrobiology 86:383-393.
14. Hättenschwiler, S., and P. Gasser. 2005. Soil animals alter plant litter diversity effects on decomposition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 102:1519-1524.
15. Hättenschwiler, S., A. V. Tiunov, and S. Scheu. 2005. Biodiversity and litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 36:191-218.
16. Hector, A., A. J. Beale, A. Minns, S. J. Otway, and J. H. Lawton. 2000. Consequences of the reduction of plant diversity for litter decomposition: effects through litter quality and microenvironment. Oikos 90:357-371.
17. Heemsbergen, D. A., M. P. Berg, M. Loreau, J. R. van Haj, J. H. Faber, and H. A. Verhoef. 2004. Biodiversity effects on soil processes explained by interspecific functional dissimilarity. Science 306:1019-1020.
18. Hieber, M., and M. O. Gessner. 2002. Contribution of stream detrivores, fungi, and bacteria to leaf breakdown based on biomass estimates. Ecology 83:1026-1038.
19. Hooper, D. U., et al. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs 75:3-35.
20. 2? Journal of Ecology 90: 1009-1016.
21. Hoorens, B., R. Aerts, and M. Stroetenga. 2003. Does initial litter chemistry explain litter mixture effects on decomposition? Oecologia 137:578-586.
22. Jonsson, M., and B. Malmqvist. 2000. Ecosystem process rate increases with animal species richness: evidence from leaf-eating, aquatic insects. Oikos 89:519-523.
23. Kominoski, J. S., C. M. Pringle, B. A. Ball, M. A. Bradford, D. C. Coleman, D. B. Hall, and M. D. Hunter. 2007. Nonadditive effects of leaf-litter species diversity on breakdown dynamics in a detritus-based stream. Ecology 88:1167-1176.
24. Lecerf, A., G. Risnoveanu, C. Popescu, M. O. Gessner, and E. Chauvet. 2007. Decomposition of diverse litter mixtures in streams. Ecology 88:219-227.
25. Leroy, C. J., and J. C. Marks. 2006. Litter quality, stream characteristics and litter diversity influence decomposition rates and macroinvertebrates. Freshwater Biology 51:605-617.
26. Loreau, M., S. Naeem, P. Inchausti, J. Bengtsson, J. P. Grime, A. Hector, D. U. Hooper, M. A. Huston, D. Raffaelli, B. Schmid, D. Tilman, and D. A. Wardle. 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:804-808.
27. McArthur, J. V., J. M. Aho, R. B. Rader, and G. L. Mills. 1994. Interspecific leaf interactions during decomposition in aquatic and floodplain ecosystems. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 13:57-67.
28. Meyer, E. I., and R. Poepperl. 2003. Secondary production of invertebrates in a Central European mountain stream (Steina, Black Forest, Germany). Archiv fur Hydrobiologie 158:25-42.
29. Meyer, E., J. Schwoerbel, and G. C. Tillmanns. 1990. Physical, chemical and hydrographical investigations of an upland stream - a contribution to the typology of small streams. Aquatic Sciences 52:236-255.
30. Moore, J. C., et al. 2004. Detritus, trophic dynamics and biodiversity. Ecology Letters 7:584-600.
31. Ostrofsky, M. L. 2007. A comment on the use of exponential decay models to test nonadditive processing hypotheses in multispecies mixtures of litter. Journal of the North America Benthological Society 26:23-27.
32. Ruesink, J. L., and D. S. Srivastava. 2001. Numerical and per capita responses to species loss: mechanisms maintaining ecosystem function in a community of stream insect detritivores. Oikos 93:221-234.
33. Sala, O. E., et al. 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287:1770-1774.
34. Schädler, M., and R. Brandl. 2005. Do invertebrate decomposers affect the disappearance rate of litter mixtures? Soil Biology and Biochemistry 37:329-337.
35. Scherer-Lorenzen, M., J. L. Bonilla, and C. Potvin. 2007. Tree species richness affects litter production and decomposition rates in a tropical biodiversity experiment. Oikos 116:2108-2124.
36. Schimel, J. P., and S. Hattenschwiler. 2007. Nitrogen transfer between decomposing leaves of different N status. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39:1428-1436.
37. Smith, V. C., and M. A. Bradford. 2003. Do non-additive effects on decomposition in litter-mix experiments result from differences in resource quality between litters? Oikos 102: 235-242.
38. Srivastava, D. S., and M. Vellend. 2005. Biodiversity-ecosystem function research: Is it relevant to conservation? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 36:267-294.
39. Suberkropp, K. 1992. Aquatic hyphomycete communities. Pages 729-747 in G. C. Carroll and D. T. Wicklow, editors. The fungal community. Its organization and role in the ecosystem. Second edition. Marcel Dekker, New York, New York, USA.
40. Swan, C. M., and M. A. Palmer. 2004. Leaf diversity alters litter breakdown in a piedmont stream. Journal of the North America Benthological Society 23:15-28.
41. Swan, C. M., and M. A. Palmer. 2006. Preferential feeding by an aquatic consumer mediates non-additive decomposition of speciose leaf litter. Oecologia 149:107-114.
42. Tiunov, A. V., and S. Scheu. 2005. Facilitative interactions rather than resource partitioning drive diversity-functioning relationships in laboratory fungal communities. Ecology Letters 8:618-625.
43. van Ruijven, J., and F. Berendse. 2005. Diversity-productivity relationships: initial effects, long-term patterns, and underlying mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 102:695-700.
44. Wallace, J. B., S. L. Eggert, J. L. Meyer, and J. R. Webster. 1997. Multiple trophic levels of a forest stream linked to terrestrial litter inputs. Science 277:102-104.
45. Wardle, D. A., K. I. Bonner, and K. S. Nicholson. 1997. Biodiversity and plant litter: experimental evidence which does not support the view that enhanced species richness improves ecosystem function. Oikos 79:247-258.
46. Wardle, D. A., M. C. Nilsson, O. Zackrisson, and C. Gallet. 2003. Determinants of litter mixing effects in a Swedish boreal forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 35:827-835.
47. Webster, J. R., and E. F. Benfield. 1986. Vascular plant breakdown in fresh-water ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17:567-594.
48. Wojdak, J. M. 2005. Relative strength of top-down, bottom-up, and consumer species richness effects on pond ecosystems. Ecological Monographs 75:489-504.