On the significance of belowground overyielding in temperate mixed forests: Separating species identity and species diversity effects

Oikos

Volumn 122, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 463-473

  Jacob, Andreas ^a   Hertel, Dietrich ^a   Leuschner, Christoph ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BELOWGROUND BIOMASS; BROAD-LEAVED FOREST; MIXED FOREST; MONOCULTURE; ROOT SYSTEM; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS; TEMPERATE FOREST; TREE;

ACER; CARPINUS; FAGUS; FRAXINUS; TILIA;

EID: 84874318934     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20476.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aarssen L. W. 1997. High productivity in grassland ecosystems: effected by species diversity or productive species? Oikos 80: 183-184.
2. Berish C. W. and Ewel J. J. 1988. Root development in simple and complex tropical successional ecosystems. Plant Soil 106: 73-84.
3. Bolte A. and Villanueva I. 2006. Interspecific competition impacts on the morphology and distribution of fine roots in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). Eur. J. For. Res. 125: 15-26.
4. Brandtberg P.-O. et al. 2000. Changes in forest-floor chemistry caused by a birch admixture in Norway spruce stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 130: 253-264.
5. Brassard B. W. et al. 2010. Differences in fine root productivity between mixed- and single-species stands. Funct. Ecol. 25: 238-246.
6. Büttner V. and Leuschner C. 1994. Spatial and temporal patterns of fine root abundance in a mixed oak-beech forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 70: 11-21.
7. Cardinale B. J. et al. 2007. Impacts of plant diversity on biomass production increase through time because of species complementarity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104: 18123-18128.
8. Cuevas E. et al. 1991. Above- and belowground organic matter storage and production in a tropical pine plantation and a paired broadleaf secondary forest. Plant Soil 135: 257-268.
9. Curt T. and Prevosto B. 2003. Rooting strategy of naturally regenerated beech in silver birch and Scots pine woodlands. Plant Soil 255: 265-279.
10. Erskine P. et al. 2006. Tree species diversity and ecosystem function: can tropical multi-species plantations generate greater productivity? For. Ecol. Manage. 233: 205-210.
11. Finér L. et al. 2007. Variation in fine root biomass of three European tree species: beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Plant Biosystems 141: 394-405.
12. Finér L. et al. 2011. Factors causing variation in fine root biomass in forest ecosystems. For. Ecol. Manage. 261: 265-277.
13. Grace J. B. et al. 2007. Does species diversity limit productivity in natural grassland communities? Ecol. Lett. 10: 680-689.
14. Guckland A. et al. 2009. Acidity, nutrient stocks, and organic-matter content in soils of a temperate deciduous forest with different abundance of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). J. Plant Nutrition Soil Sci. 172: 500-511.
15. Guo D. et al. 2008. Anatomical traits associated with absorption and mycorrhizal colonization are linked to root branch order in twenty-three Chinese temperate tree species. New Phytol. 180: 673-683.
16. Hector A. et al. 1999. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science 286: 1123-1127.
17. Hendriks C. M. A. and Bianchi F. J. J. 1995. Root density and root biomass in pure and mixed forest stands of Douglas- fir and beech. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 43: 321-331.
18. Hertel D. 1999. Das Feinwurzelsystem von Rein- und Mischbeständen der Rotbuche: Struktur, Dynamik und interspezifische Konkurrenz. Diss. Bot. 317. J. Cramer, Stuttgart.
19. Holmgren M. et al. 1997. The interplay of facilitation and competition in plant communities. Ecology 78: 1966-1975.
20. Hölscher D. et al. 2002. Tree species diversity and soil patchiness in a temperate broad-leaved forest with limited rooting space. Flora Morphol. Distrib. Funct. Ecol. Plants 197: 118-125.
21. Jacob M. et al. 2010a. Productivity of temperate broad-leaved forest stands differing in tree species diversity. Ann. For. Sci. 67: 503.
22. Jacob M. et al. 2010b. Leaf litter decomposition in temperate deciduous forest stands with a decreasing fraction of beech (Fagus sylvatica). Oecologia 164: 1083-1094.
23. Kahmen A. et al. 2005. Effects of plant diversity, community composition and environmental parameters on productivity in montane European grasslands. Oecologia 142: 606-615.
24. Kahmen A. et al. 2006. Niche complementarity for nitrogen: an explanation for the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning relationship? Ecology 87: 1244-1255.
25. Korn S. 2004. Experimentelle Untersuchung der Wasseraufnahme und der hydraulischen Eigenschaften des Wurzelsystems von sechs heimischen Baumarten. - PhD thesis, Univ. of Göttingen, Germany.
26. Kutschera L. et al. 2009. Wurzelatlas der Kulturpflanzen gemäßigter Gebiete mit Arten des Feldgemüsebaues. - DLG Press.
27. Legare S. et al. 2005. Effect of aspen (Populus tremuloides) as a companion species on the growth of black spruce (Picea mariana) in the southwestern boreal forest of Quebec. For. Ecol. Manage. 208: 211-222.
28. Lei X. et al. 2009. Relationships between stand growth and structural diversity in spruce-dominated forests in New Brunswick, Canada. Can. J. For. Res. 39: 1835-1847.
29. Leuschner C. and Hertel D. 2003. Fine root biomass of temperate forests in relation to soil acidity and fertility, climate, age and species. - Esser K. et al. (eds), Progress in Botany. Springer, pp. 405-438.
30. Leuschner C. et al. 2001. Root competition between beech and oak: a hypothesis. Oecologia 126: 276-284.
31. Leuschner C. et al. 2009. Functional role of forest diversity: pros and cons of synthetic stands and across-site comparisons in established forests. Basic Appl. Ecol. 10: 1-9.
32. Long J. N. and Shaw J. D. 2010. The influence of compositional and structural diversity on forest productivity. Forestry 83: 121-128.
33. Loreau M. 1998. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: a mechanistic model. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95: 5632-5636.
34. Meinen C. et al. 2009a. Biomass and morphology of fine roots in temperate broad-leaved forests differing in tree species diversity: is there evidence of below-ground overyielding? Oecologia 161: 99-111.
35. Meinen C. et al. 2009b. No evidence of spatial root system segregation and elevated fine root biomass in multi-species temperate broad-leaved forests. Trees 23: 941-950.
36. Morgan J. L. et al. 1992. Nitrogen relations of mixed-species stands on oligotrophic soils. - Cannell M. G. R. et al. (eds), The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, pp. 65-85.
37. Oelmann Y. et al. 2010. Tree mixture effects on aboveground nutrient pools of trees in an experimental plantation in Panama. Plant Soil 326: 199-212.
38. Paquette A. and Messier C. 2011. The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 20: 170-180.
39. Persson H. Å. 1978. Root dynamics in a young Scots pine stand in central Sweden. Oikos 30: 508-519.
40. Persson H. Å. 1983. The distribution and productivity of fine roots in boreal forests. Plant Soil 71: 87-101.
41. Pretzsch H. and Schütze G. 2009. Transgressive overyielding in mixed compared with pure stands of Norway spruce and European beech in central Europe: evidence on stand level and explanation on individual tree level. Eur. J. For. Res. 128: 183-204.
42. Pretzsch H. et al. 2010. Comparison between the productivity of pure and mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech along an ecological gradient. Ann. For. Sci. 67: 712.
43. Rajaniemi T. K. et al. 2003. Root competition can cause a decline in diversity with increased productivity. J. Ecol. 91: 407-416.
44. Rewald B. and Leuschner C. 2009. Belowground competition in a broad-leaved temperate mixed forest: pattern analysis and experiments in a four-species stand. Eur. J. For. Res. 128: 387-398.
45. Roscher C. et al. 2005. Overyielding in experimental grassland communities - irrespective of species pool or spatial scale. Ecol. Lett. 8: 419-429.
46. Rust S. and Savill P. S. 2000. The root systems of Fraxinus excelsior and Fagus sylvatica and their competitive relationships. Forestry 73: 499-508.
47. Schenk H. J. 2006. Root competition: beyond resource depletion. J. Ecol. 94: 725-739.
48. Scherer-Lorenzen M. et al. 2005. The functional significance of forest diversity: a synthesis. - Scherer-Lorenzen M. et al. (eds), Forest diversity and function. Ecological Studies 176. Springer, pp. 377-390.
49. Schmid I. 2002. The influence of soil type and interspecific competition on the fine root system of Norway spruce and European beech. Basic Appl. Ecol. 3: 339-346.
50. Schmid I. and Kazda M. 2002. Root distribution of Norway spruce in monospecific and mixed stands on different soils. For. Ecol. Manage. 159: 37-47.
51. Szwagrzyk J. and Gazda A. 2007. Above-ground standing biomass and tree species diversity in natural stands of central Europe. J. Veg. Sci. 18: 555-562.
52. Thompson K. et al. 2005. Biodiversity, ecosystem function and plant traits in mature and immature plant communities. Funct. Ecol. 19: 355-358.
53. Tilman D. 2001. Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 294: 843-845.
54. Vilà M. et al. 2005. Confounding factors in the observational productivity-diversity relationship in forests. - Scherer-Lorenzen M. et al. (eds), Forest diversity and function. Ecological Studies 176. Springer, pp. 65-86.
55. Vilà M. et al. 2007. Species richness and wood production: a positive association in Mediterranean forests. Ecol. Lett. 10: 241-250.
56. von Felten S. et al. 2009. Belowground nitrogen partitioning in experimental grassland plant communities of varying species richness. Ecology 90: 1389-1399.