Long‐term dynamics of pine and hardwood litter in contrasting environments: toward a global model of decomposition

• Published in: Global Change Biology
• Main Authors: Gholz, Henry L., Wedin, David A., Smitherman, Stephen M., Harmon, Mark E., Parton, William J.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2000
• Subjects: Arctic; Tundra
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00349.x; https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1046%2Fj.1365-2486.2000.00349.x; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00349.x

Summary We analysed data on mass loss after five years of decomposition in the field from both fine root and leaf litters from two highly contrasting trees, Drypetes glauca , a tropical hardwood tree from Puerto Rico, and pine species from North America as part of the Long‐Term Intersite Decomposition Experiment (LIDET). LIDET is a reciprocal litterbag study involving the transplanting of litter from 27 species across 28 sites in North and Central America reflecting a wide variety of natural and managed ecosystems and climates, from Arctic tundra to tropical rainforest. After 5 years, estimated k ‐values ranged from 0.032 to 3.734, lengths of Phase I (to 20% mass remaining) from 0.49 to 47.92 years, and fractional mass remaining from 0 to 0.81. Pine litter decomposed more slowly than Drypetes litter, supporting the notion of strong control of substrate quality over decomposition rates. Climate exerted strong and consistent effects on decomposition. Neither mean annual temperature or precipitation alone explained the global pattern of decomposition; variables including both moisture availability and temperature (i.e. actual evapotranspiration and DEFAC from the CENTURY model) were generally more robust than single variables. Across the LIDET range, decomposition of fine roots exhibited a Q 10 of 2 and was more predictable than that of leaves, which had a higher Q 10 and greater variability. Roots generally decomposed more slowly than leaves, regardless of genus, but the ratio of above‐ to belowground decomposition rates differed sharply across ecosystem types. Finally, Drypetes litter decomposed much more rapidly than pine litter in ‘broadleaved habitats’ than in ‘conifer habitats’, evidence for a ‘home‐field advantage’ for this litter. These results collectively suggest that relatively simple models can predict decomposition based on litter quality and regional climate, but that ecosystem‐specific problems may add complications.