Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness
In arctic Alaska, researchers have manipulated air temperature, light availability, and soil nutrient availability in several tundra communities over the past two decades. These communities responded quite differently to the same manipulations, and species responded individualistically within commun...
Published in: | Oikos |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wiley
2003
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1034%2Fj.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x |
id |
crwiley:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
crwiley:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x 2024-09-15T18:39:32+00:00 Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness Gough, Laura Hobbie, Sarah E. 2003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1034%2Fj.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor Oikos volume 103, issue 1, page 204-216 ISSN 0030-1299 1600-0706 journal-article 2003 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x 2024-08-06T04:17:34Z In arctic Alaska, researchers have manipulated air temperature, light availability, and soil nutrient availability in several tundra communities over the past two decades. These communities responded quite differently to the same manipulations, and species responded individualistically within communities and among sites. For example, moist acidic tundra is primarily nitrogen (N)‐limited, whereas wet sedge tundra is primarily phosphorus (P)‐limited, and the magnitude of growth responses varies across sites within communities. Here we report results of four years of manipulated nutrients (N and/or P) and/or air temperature in an understudied, diverse plant community, moist non‐acidic tussock tundra, in northern Alaska. Our goals were to determine which factors limit above‐ground net primary productivity (ANPP) and biomass, how community composition changes may affect ecosystem attributes, and to compare these results with those from other communities to determine their generality. Although relative abundance of functional groups shifted in several treatments, the only significant change in community‐level ANPP and biomass occurred in plots that received both N and P, driven by an increase in graminoid biomass and production resulting from a positive effect of adding N. There was no difference in community biomass among any other treatments; however, some growth forms and individual species did respond. After four years no one species has come to dominate the treatment plots and species richness has not changed. These results are similar to studies in dry heath, wet sedge, and moist acidic tundra where community biomass had the greatest response to both N and P and warming results were more subtle. Unlike in moist acidic tundra where shrub biomass increased markedly with fertilization, our results suggest that in non‐acidic tundra carbon sequestration in plant biomass will not increase substantially under increased soil nutrient conditions because of the lack of overstory shrub species. Article in Journal/Newspaper Tundra Alaska Wiley Online Library Oikos 103 1 204 216 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Wiley Online Library |
op_collection_id |
crwiley |
language |
English |
description |
In arctic Alaska, researchers have manipulated air temperature, light availability, and soil nutrient availability in several tundra communities over the past two decades. These communities responded quite differently to the same manipulations, and species responded individualistically within communities and among sites. For example, moist acidic tundra is primarily nitrogen (N)‐limited, whereas wet sedge tundra is primarily phosphorus (P)‐limited, and the magnitude of growth responses varies across sites within communities. Here we report results of four years of manipulated nutrients (N and/or P) and/or air temperature in an understudied, diverse plant community, moist non‐acidic tussock tundra, in northern Alaska. Our goals were to determine which factors limit above‐ground net primary productivity (ANPP) and biomass, how community composition changes may affect ecosystem attributes, and to compare these results with those from other communities to determine their generality. Although relative abundance of functional groups shifted in several treatments, the only significant change in community‐level ANPP and biomass occurred in plots that received both N and P, driven by an increase in graminoid biomass and production resulting from a positive effect of adding N. There was no difference in community biomass among any other treatments; however, some growth forms and individual species did respond. After four years no one species has come to dominate the treatment plots and species richness has not changed. These results are similar to studies in dry heath, wet sedge, and moist acidic tundra where community biomass had the greatest response to both N and P and warming results were more subtle. Unlike in moist acidic tundra where shrub biomass increased markedly with fertilization, our results suggest that in non‐acidic tundra carbon sequestration in plant biomass will not increase substantially under increased soil nutrient conditions because of the lack of overstory shrub species. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Gough, Laura Hobbie, Sarah E. |
spellingShingle |
Gough, Laura Hobbie, Sarah E. Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
author_facet |
Gough, Laura Hobbie, Sarah E. |
author_sort |
Gough, Laura |
title |
Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
title_short |
Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
title_full |
Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
title_fullStr |
Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
title_full_unstemmed |
Responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
title_sort |
responses of moist non‐acidic arctic tundra to altered environment: productivity, biomass, and species richness |
publisher |
Wiley |
publishDate |
2003 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1034%2Fj.1600-0706.2003.12363.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x |
genre |
Tundra Alaska |
genre_facet |
Tundra Alaska |
op_source |
Oikos volume 103, issue 1, page 204-216 ISSN 0030-1299 1600-0706 |
op_rights |
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12363.x |
container_title |
Oikos |
container_volume |
103 |
container_issue |
1 |
container_start_page |
204 |
op_container_end_page |
216 |
_version_ |
1810483896646631424 |