Advertisement

Drought and phosphorus affect productivity of a mesic grassland via shifts in root traits of dominant species

  • Jeff Chieppa
  • Uffe N. Nielsen
  • David T. Tissue
  • Sally A. Power
Regular Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

Aims

Precipitation and soil nutrients play an important role in regulating grassland productivity. However, little is known regarding the sensitivity of grasslands to changes in water and nutrient availability and the mechanisms driving productivity responses.

Methods

We examined the effects of extreme drought (65% rainfall reduction) and phosphorus fertilization on aboveground net primary production (ANPP) and plant functional traits (PFTs) of four dominant mesic grassland species in a semi-natural grassland in southeast Australia. We used piecewise structural equation modelling to determine which PFTs contribute to the treatment effects on ANPP.

Results

Reduced rainfall decreased ANPP by 29% while P addition increased ANPP by 62% at the community-level. Significant drought-related reductions in ANPP were apparent for Setaria parviflora, while Cynodon dactylon was the only species exhibiting increased ANPP under P addition. There was no interaction between rainfall and P addition. Structural equation modelling indicated specific root length was a key trait underpinning community-level ANPP responses to P; this was, however, primarily driven by a single dominant (~61% of community biomass) species (Cynodon).

Conclusions

Our results indicate the negative impacts of drought on ANPP – driven primarily by Setaria– were not ameliorated by P addition. The positive effect of P addition on community-level ANPP was attributed to the response of the most dominant species, Cynodon, and mediated by changes in specific root length. This study highlights the importance of understanding the link between belowground traits and ANPP for predicting dominant species’ response to global change drivers.

Keywords

Plant functional traits Grasslands Phosphorus fertilization Drought Aboveground productivity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding for graduate research was provided from the Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment at Western Sydney University and by an Australian Research Council grant awarded to UNN (DP150104199). The authors would like to thank Burhan Amiji and Dr. Craig Barton for installation and maintenance of environmental sensors at the site.

Author contributions

JC conceived the ideas, acquired data, analysed data and wrote the manuscript. UN, DT and SP designed the experimental site and contributed critically to manuscript development.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest for the work presented

Supplementary material

11104_2019_4290_MOESM1_ESM.docx (195 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 195 kb)

References

  1. Akram NA, Shahbaz M, Ashraf M (2007) Relationship of Photosynthetic Capacity and Proline Accumulation with the Growth of Differently Adapted Populations of Two Potential Grasses (Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. and Cenchrus ciliaris L.) to Drought Stress. Pak J Bot 39(3):777–786Google Scholar
  2. Alam SM (1999) Nutrient uptake by plants under stress conditions. Handbook Plant Crop Stress 2:285–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albert CH, Thuiller W, Yoccoz NG, Soudant A, Boucher F, Saccone P, Lavorel S (2010) Intraspecific functional variability: extent, structure and sources of variation. J Ecol 98(3):604–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Augé RM (2001) Water relations, drought and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal Symbiosis. Mycorrhiza 11(1):3–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Austin AT, Yahdjian L, Stark JM, Belnap J, Porporato A, Norton U, Ravetta DA, Schaeffer SM (2004) Water pulses and biogeochemical cycles in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Oecologia 141(2):221–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baldocchi DD, Xu L, Kiang N (2004) How plant functional-type, weather, seasonal drought, and soil physical properties Alter water and energy fluxes of an oak–grass savanna and an annual grassland. Agric For Meteorol 123(1):13–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bardgett RD, Mommer L, De Vries FT (2014) Going underground: root traits as drivers of ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 29(12):692–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beierkuhnlein C, Thiel D, Jentsch A, Willner E, Kreyling J (2011) Ecotypes of European grass species respond differently to warming and extreme drought. J Ecol 99(3):703–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bennett LT, Adams MA (2001) Response of a perennial grassland to nitrogen and phosphorus additions in sub-tropical, semi-arid Australia. J Arid Environ 48(3):289–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benson D, Howell J (2002) Cumberland plain woodland ecology then and now: interpretations and implications from the work of Robert Brown and Others. Cunninghamia 7:631–650Google Scholar
  11. Bernhardt-Römermann M, Römermann C, Sperlich S, Schmidt W (2011) Explaining grassland biomass–the contribution of climate, species and functional diversity depends on fertilization and mowing frequency. J Appl Ecol 48(5):1088–1097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bretz F, Westfall P, Hothorn T (2016) Multiple comparisons using R. Chapman and Hall/CRC, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ceulemans T, Stevens CJ, Duchateau L, Jacquemyn H, Gowing DJG, Merckx R, Wallace H, Van Rooijen N, Goethem T, Bobbink R (2014) Soil phosphorus constrains biodiversity across European grasslands. Glob Chang Biol 20(12):3814–3822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark CM, Tilman D (2008) Loss of plant species after chronic low-level nitrogen deposition to prairie grasslands. Nature 451(7179):712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Comas L, Becker S, Cruz VMV, Byrne PF, Dierig DA (2013) Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Front Plant Sci 4.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00442
  16. Copeland SM, Harrison SP, Latimer AM, Damschen EI, Eskelinen AM, Fernandez-Going B, Spasojevic MJ, Anacker BL, Thorne JH (2016) Ecological effects of extreme drought on Californian herbaceous plant communities. Ecol Monogr http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecm.1218/full
  17. Cornelissen JHC, Lavorel S, Garnier E, Diaz S, Buchmann N, Gurvich DE, Reich PB et al (2003) A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust J Bot 51(4):335–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crawley MJ, Johnston AE, Silvertown J, Dodd M, de Mazancourt C, Heard MS, Henman DF, Edwards GR (2005) Determinants of species richness in the park grass experiment. Am Nat 165(2):179–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DiTommaso A, Aarssen LW (1989) Resource manipulations in natural vegetation: a review. Vegetatio 84(1):9–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. dos Santos MG, Ribeiro RV, de Oliveira RF, Machado EC, Pimentel C (2006) The role of inorganic phosphate on photosynthesis recovery of common bean after a mild water deficit. Plant Sci 170(3):659–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duffy JE, Lefcheck JS, Stuart-Smith RD, Navarrete SA, Edgar GJ (2016) Biodiversity enhances reef fish biomass and resistance to climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(22):6230–6235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Easterling DR, Evans JL, Groisman PY, Karl TR et al (2000) Observed variability and trends in extreme climate events: a brief review. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 81(3):417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ellsworth DS, Anderson IC, Crous KY, Cooke J, Drake JE, Gherlenda AN, Gimeno TE, Macdonald CA, Medlyn BE, Powell JR (2017) Elevated CO 2 does not increase eucalypt Forest productivity on a low-phosphorus soil. Nat Clim Chang 7(4):279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Evans JP, Argueso D, Olson R, Di Luca A (2017) Bias-corrected regional climate projections of extreme rainfall in south-East Australia. Theor Appl Climatol 130(3–4):1085–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fay PA, Blair JM, Smith MD, Nippert JB, Carlisle JD, Knapp AK (2011) Relative effects of precipitation variability and warming on tallgrass prairie ecosystem function. Biogeosciences 8(10):3053–3068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fay PA, Prober SM, Harpole WS, Knops JMH, Bakker JD, Borer ET, Lind EM, MacDougall AS, Seabloom EW, Wragg PD (2015) Grassland productivity limited by multiple nutrients. Nature Plants 1:15080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Field TRO, Forde MB (1990) Effects of Climate Warming on the Distribution of C4 Grasses in New Zealand. Proc N Z Grassland Assoc 51:47–50Google Scholar
  28. Fitter AH (1991) Characteristics and functions of root systems. Plant Roots: Hidden Half 2:1–29Google Scholar
  29. Fort F, Cruz P, Jouany C (2014) Hierarchy of root functional trait values and plasticity drive early-stage competition for water and phosphorus among grasses. Funct Ecol 28(4):1030–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fort F, Cruz P, Catrice O, Delbrut A, Luzarreta M, Stroia C, Jouany C (2015) Root functional trait syndromes and plasticity drive the ability of grassland Fabaceae to tolerate water and phosphorus shortage. Environ Exp Bot 110:62–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fraser LH, Henry HAL, Carlyle CN, White SR, Beierkuhnlein C, Cahill JF, Casper BB et al (2013) Coordinated distributed experiments: an emerging tool for testing global hypotheses in ecology and environmental science. Front Ecol Environ 11(3):147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Garnier E, Shipley B, Roumet C, Laurent G (2001) A standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content. Funct Ecol 15(5):688–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gazol A, Uria-Diez J, Elustondo D, Garrigó J, Ibáñez R (2016) Fertilization triggers 11 Yr of changes in community assembly in Mediterranean grassland. J Veg Sci 27(4):728–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gough L, Osenberg CW, Gross KL, Collins SL (2000) Fertilization effects on species density and primary productivity in herbaceous plant communities. Oikos 89(3):428–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Griffin-Nolan RJ, Bushey JA, Carroll CJW, Challis A, Chieppa J, Garbowski M, Hoffman AM, Post AK, Slette IJ, Spitzer D (2018) Trait selection and community weighting are key to understanding ecosystem responses to changing precipitation regimes. Funct Ecol (32)7 1746–1756Google Scholar
  36. Grime JP (1973) Competitive exclusion in herbaceous vegetation. Nature 242(5396):344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grime JP (1998) Benefits of plant diversity to ecosystems: immediate, filter and founder effects. J Ecol 86(6):902–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Grime JP, Thompson K, Hunt R, Hodgson JG, Cornelissen JHC, Rorison IH, Hendry GAF, Ashenden TW, Askew AP, Band SR (1997) Integrated screening validates primary axes of specialisation in plants. Oikos 79, 259–281Google Scholar
  39. Guo Q, Hu Z, Li S, Li X, Sun X, Yu G (2012) Spatial variations in aboveground net primary productivity along a climate gradient in Eurasian temperate grassland: effects of mean annual precipitation and its seasonal distribution. Glob Chang Biol 18(12):3624–3631.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Haling RE, Yang Z, Shadwell N, Culvenor RA, Stefanski A, Ryan MH, Sandral GA, Kidd DR, Lambers H, Simpson RJ (2016) Root morphological traits that determine phosphorus-acquisition efficiency and critical external phosphorus requirement in pasture species. Funct Plant Biol 43(9):815–826.  https://doi.org/10.1071/FP16037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hejcman M, Klaudisová M, Štursa J, Pavlŭ V, Schellberg J, Hejcmanová P, Hakl J, Rauch O, Vacek S (2007) Revisiting a 37 years abandoned fertilizer experiment on Nardus grassland in the Czech Republic. Agric Ecosyst Environ 118(1–4):231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hetrick BAD, Wilson GWT, Todd TC (1990) Differential responses of C3 and C4 grasses to mycorrhizal Symbiosis, phosphorus fertilization, and soil microorganisms. Can J Bot 68(3):461–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hofer D, Suter M, Buchmann N, Lüscher A (2017) Nitrogen status of functionally different forage species explains resistance to severe drought and Post-drought overcompensation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 236:312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Homyak PM, Allison SD, Huxman TE, Goulden ML, Treseder KK (2017) Effects of drought manipulation on soil nitrogen cycling: a meta-analysis. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 122(12):3260–3272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P, Heiberger RM, Schuetzenmeister A, Scheibe S, Hothorn MT (2017) Package ‘Multcomp.’ Obtenido de http://cran.stat.sfu.ca/web/packages/multcomp/multcomp.pdf
  46. Hu Y, Schmidhalter U (2005) Drought and salinity: a comparison of their effects on mineral nutrition of plants. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 168(4):541–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Huang B, Wilkinson RE (2000) Role of root morphological and physiological characteristics in drought resistance of plant. In Plant-environment interaction, New York, Marcel Decker. pp. 39–64Google Scholar
  48. Huang B, Gao H (2000) Root physiological characteristics associated with drought resistance in tall fescue cultivars. Crop Sci 40(1):196–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Huxman TE, Smith MD, Fay PA, Knapp AK, Shaw MR, Loik ME, Smith SD et al (2004) Convergence across biomes to a common rain-use efficiency. Nature 429(6992):651–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. IPCC, 2013: Climate Change (2013) The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, and Midgley PM (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, pp 1535.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324
  51. Johnson SN, Lopaticki G, Hartley SE (2014) Elevated atmospheric CO2 triggers compensatory feeding by root herbivores on a C3 but not a C4 grass. PLoS One 9(3):e90251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jung V, Albert CH, Violle C, Kunstler G, Loucougaray G, Spiegelberger T (2014) Intraspecific trait variability mediates the response of subalpine grassland communities to extreme drought events. J Ecol 102(1):45–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Katz GS, Restori AF, Lee HB (2009) A Monte Carlo study comparing the Levene test to other homogeneity of variance tests. N Am J Psychol 11(3):511–521Google Scholar
  54. Kenward MG, Roger JH (1997) Small Sample Inference for Fixed Effects from Restricted Maximum Likelihood. Biometrics 53(3):983–997Google Scholar
  55. Knapp AK, Briggs JM, Koelliker JK (2001) Frequency and extent of water limitation to primary production in a Mesic temperate grassland. Ecosystems 4(1):19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Knapp AK, Fay PA, Blair JM, Collins SL, Smith MD, Carlisle JD, Harper CW, Danner BT, Lett MS, McCarron JK (2002) Rainfall variability, carbon cycling, and plant species diversity in a Mesic grassland. Science 298(5601):2202–2205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Knapp AK, Beier C, Briske DD, Classen AT, Luo Y, Reichstein M, Smith MD et al (2008) Consequences of more extreme precipitation regimes for terrestrial ecosystems. BioScience 58(9):811–821.  https://doi.org/10.1641/B580908 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Knapp AK, Carroll CJW, Denton EM, La Pierre KJ, Collins SL, Smith MD (2015) Differential sensitivity to regional-scale drought in six central US grasslands. Oecologia 177(4):949–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kramer-Walter KR, Bellingham PJ, Millar TR, Smissen RD, Richardson SJ, Laughlin DC (2016) Root traits are multidimensional: specific root length is independent from root tissue density and the plant economic Spectrum. J Ecol 104(5):1299–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. La Pierre KJ, Blumenthal DM, Brown CS, Klein JA, Smith MD (2016) Drivers of variation in aboveground net primary productivity and plant community composition differ across a broad precipitation gradient. Ecosystems 19(3):521–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lambers JHR, Harpole WS, Tilman D, Knops J, Reich PB (2004) Mechanisms responsible for the positive diversity–productivity relationship in Minnesota grasslands. Ecol Lett 7(8):661–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lambers H, Shane MW, Cramer MD, Pearse SJ, Veneklaas EJ (2006) Root structure and functioning for efficient Acquisition of Phosphorus: matching morphological and physiological traits. Ann Bot 98(4):693–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. LeCain DR, Morgan JA, Schuman GE, Reeder JD, Hart RH (2002) Carbon exchange and species composition of grazed pastures and Exclosures in the shortgrass steppe of Colorado. Agric Ecosyst Environ 93(1):421–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lee M, Manning P, Rist J, Power SA, Marsh C (2010) A global comparison of grassland biomass responses to CO2 and nitrogen enrichment. Philos Trans Royal Soc B 365(1549):2047–2056Google Scholar
  65. Lefcheck JS (2016) PiecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equation modelling in r for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol Evol 7(5):573–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Manschadi AM, Christopher J, Hammer GL (2006) The role of root architectural traits in adaptation of wheat to water-limited environments. Funct Plant Biol 33(9):823–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Marulanda A, Azcon R, Ruiz-Lozano JM (2003) Contribution of six arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal isolates to water uptake by Lactuca Sativa plants under drought stress. Physiol Plant 119(4):526–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McKane RB, Johnson LC, Shaver GR, Nadelhoffer KJ, Rastetter EB, Fry B, Giblin AE, Kielland K, Kwiatkowski BL, Laundre JA (2002) Resource-based niches provide a basis for plant species diversity and dominance in Arctic tundra. Nature 415(6867):68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Medrano H, Escalona JM, Bota J, Gulías J, Flexas J (2002) Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought: stomatal conductance as a reference parameter. Ann Bot 89(7):895–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Morgan JW, Dwyer JM, Price JN, Prober SM, Power SA, Firn J, Moore JL, Wardle GM, Seabloom EW, Borer ET (2016) Species origin affects the rate of response to inter-annual growing season precipitation and nutrient addition in four Australian native grasslands. J Veg Sci 27(6):1164–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Newell PD, Douglas AE (2014) Interspecies interactions determine the impact of the gut microbiota on nutrient allocation in drosophila melanogaster. Appl Environ Microbiol 80(2):788–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Oliveira BF, Machac A, Costa GC, Brooks TM, Davidson AD, Rondinini C, Graham CH (2016) Species and functional diversity accumulate differently in mammals. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25(9):1119–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Onipchenko VG, Makarov MI, Akhmetzhanova AA, Soudzilovskaia NA, Aibazova FU, Elkanova MK, Stogova AV, Cornelissen JHC (2012) Alpine plant functional group responses to Fertiliser addition depend on abiotic regime and community composition. Plant Soil 357(1–2):103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Osonubi O (1994) Comparative effects of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculation and phosphorus fertilization on growth and phosphorus uptake of maize (Zea mays L.) and Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) plants under drought-stressed conditions. Biol Fertil Soils 18(1):55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Core Team (2013) Nlme: nonlinear mixed-effects models. R Package, 3–1, 104Google Scholar
  76. Ploughe LW, Jacobs EM, Frank GS, Greenler SM, Smith MD, Dukes JS (2018) Community response to extreme drought (CRED): a framework for drought-induced shifts in plant-plant interactions. New Phytol 222(1) 52–69Google Scholar
  77. R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
  78. Reich PB (2014) The world-wide ‘fast–Slow’Plant economics Spectrum: a traits manifesto. J Ecol 102(2):275–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Ripley B, Frole K, Gilbert M (2010) Differences in drought sensitivities and photosynthetic limitations between Co-Occurring C3 and C4 (NADP-ME) panicoid grasses. Annals of Botany 105(3):493–503Google Scholar
  80. Ruiz-Lozano JM, Azcón R, Gomez M (1995) Effects of arbuscular-mycorrhizal Glomus species on drought tolerance: physiological and nutritional plant responses. Appl Environ Microbiol 61(2):456–460Google Scholar
  81. Seneviratne SI, Nicholls N, Easterling D, Goodess CM, Kanae S, Kossin J, Luo Y, Marengo J, McInnes K, Rahimi M (2012) Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment. In Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation Chapter 3. A special report of working groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeGoogle Scholar
  82. Shipley B (2000) A new inferential test for path models based on directed acyclic graphs. Struct Equ Model 7(2):206–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Smith MD, Knapp AK, Collins SL (2009) A framework for assessing ecosystem dynamics in response to chronic resource alterations induced by global change. Ecology 90(12):3279–3289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Soliveres S, Maestre FT, Ulrich W, Manning P, Boch S, Bowker MA, Prati D, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Quero JL, Schöning I (2015) Intransitive competition is widespread in plant communities and maintains their species richness. Ecol Lett 18(8):790–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Suttie JM, Reynolds SG, Batello C (2005) Grasslands of the World. Food & Agriculture Organization of the United NationsGoogle Scholar
  86. Tardif A, Shipley B, Bloor JMG, Soussana J (2014) Can the biomass-ratio hypothesis predict mixed-species litter decomposition along a climatic gradient? Ann Bot 113(5):843–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Thorpe N (1980) Accumulation of carbon compounds in the epidermis of five species with either different photosynthetic systems or stomatal structure. Plant Cell Environ 3(6):451–460Google Scholar
  88. Tiessen H (2008) Phosphorus in the Global Environment. In The Ecophysiology of Plant-Phosphorus Interactions, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, 1–7Google Scholar
  89. Trubat R, Cortina J, Vilagrosa A (2006) Plant Morphology and Root Hydraulics Are Altered by Nutrient Deficiency in Pistacia lentiscus (L.). Trees 20(3):334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Trumper K (2009) The natural fix?: the role of ecosystems in climate mitigation: a UNEP rapid response assessment. United Nations Environment Programme (United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge)Google Scholar
  91. Volaire F (2008) Plant traits and functional types to characterise drought survival of Pluri-specific perennial herbaceous swards in Mediterranean areas. Eur J Agron 29(2):116–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Volaire F, Barkaoui K, Norton M (2014) Designing resilient and sustainable grasslands for a drier future: adaptive strategies, functional traits and biotic interactions. Eur J Agron 52:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Walter J, Grant K, Beierkuhnlein C, Kreyling J, Weber M, Jentsch A (2012) Increased rainfall variability reduces biomass and forage quality of temperate grassland largely independent of mowing frequency. Agric Ecosyst Environ 148:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Yahdjian L, Gherardi L, Sala OE (2011) Nitrogen limitation in arid-subhumid ecosystems: a meta-analysis of fertilization studies. J Arid Environ 75(8):675–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Yu Z, Zeng D, Jiang F, Zhao Q (2009) Responses of biomass to the addition of water, nitrogen and phosphorus in Keerqin Sandy grassland, Inner Mongolia, China. J For Res 20(1):23–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Zheng Z, Bai W, Zhang W (2019) Root Trait-Mediated Belowground Competition and Community Composition of a Temperate Steppe under Nitrogen Enrichment. Plant and Soil 437(1-2):1–14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeff Chieppa
    • 1
    • 2
  • Uffe N. Nielsen
    • 1
  • David T. Tissue
    • 1
  • Sally A. Power
    • 1
  1. 1.Hawkesbury Institute for the EnvironmentWestern Sydney UniversityRichmondAustralia
  2. 2.PenrithAustralia

Personalised recommendations