Advertisement

Nitrogen and carbon cycling associated with litterfall production in monoculture teak and mixed species teak and flueggea stands

  • Vaeno Vigulu
  • Timothy J. Blumfield
  • Frédérique Reverchon
  • Shahla Hosseini BaiEmail author
  • Zhihong Xu
Soils, Sec 1 • Soil Organic Matter Dynamics and Nutrient Cycling • Research Article

Abstract

Purpose

High demand for teak (Tectona grandis L.f.), a species of economic importance, was the reason Solomon Islands experienced a surge in community-wide planting of monoculture teak stands in the last two decades. Mixed species planting of teak and flueggea (Flueggea flexuosa Muell. Arg.) was introduced to overcome the reluctance of growers to thin their stands. However, there is lack of information on the effect of changing from monoculture to mixed species plantings on the cycling of nutrients especially carbon (C) and nitrogen (N).

Materials and methods

This study assessed litter quantity and quality, total C (TC), total N (TN), C:N ratio and C and N isotope compositions (δ13C and δ15N) over 18 months at two sites (Ringgi and Poitete). The treatments included teak planted at 833 stems per hectare (sph) (T1), teak planted in rows with two rows of flueggea at 833 sph (T2), 625 sph (T3) and 416 sph (T4), and teak planted in alternating rows with flueggea at 833 sph (T5).

Results and discussion

Treatment 1 (T1) produced significantly higher total litter than T4 at Ringgi. However, based on individual tree litterfall production, teak in T4 (lowest stocking rate) at both trials produced higher litter per tree than the teak in T3, T2, T5 and T1 while there was no significant difference with litter production of flueggea. An enrichment of litter δ15N was observed over time in either species, which suggested an increased N loss and transformations in both experimental sites. When comparing each treatment and using individual tree productivity, T4 significantly produced and returned higher litter TC and TN than T3, T2, T5 and T1.

Conclusions

Overall, individual tree productivity demonstrated that mixed species stands had a significant potential for cycling higher rates of C and N than monoculture teak stands. Therefore, establishment of mixed species stands, especially T4 and T3, was recommended as a practical measure to address the widely experienced problem of reluctance by growers to thin high value trees while preserving the balance of C and N inputs into the ground.

Keywords

C:N ratio C and N isotope compositions Flueggea flexuosa Mixed species Monoculture Tectona grandis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research reported here was undertaken through a series of projects supported by the Australian Centre for international Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Canberra, Australia and the Solomon Island Government Ministry of Forestry Research. V. W. Vigulu was supported in this work through a John Allwright Fellowship grant from ACIAR. Kolombangara Forest Products Limited provided staff and transportation and made research sites available for the project. The staff of Munda and Poitete Forestry Offices assisted in the establishment of, and data collection from, the sites. We would like to thank Griffith University for their technical help and support and Rene Diocares for timely analysis of the plant and soil samples.

Supplementary material

11368_2019_2275_MOESM1_ESM.docx (93 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 92 kb)

References

  1. Andivia E, Vázquez-Piqué J, Fernández M, Alejano R (2013) Litter production in holm oak trees subjected to different pruning intensities in Mediterranean dehesas. Agrofor Syst 87:657–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt SK, Wanek W, Clifford SC, Popp M (2000) Contrasting adaptations to drought stress in field-grown Ziziphus mauritiana and Prunus persica trees: water relations, osmotic adjustment and carbon isotope composition. Aust J Plant Physiol 27:985–996Google Scholar
  3. Ashagrie Y, Zech W (2013) Litter production and nutrient cycling in two plantations and a Podocarpus falcatus dominated natural forest ecosystems in south-eastern highlands of Ethiopia. Afr J Agric Res 8:4810–4818Google Scholar
  4. Attiwill PM, Adams MA (1993) Tansley review no. 50. Nutrient cycling in forests. New Phytol 124:561–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bai SH, Blumfield TJ, Reverchon F, Amini S (2015) Do young trees contribute to soil labile carbon and nitrogen recovery? J Soils Sediments 15:503–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bai SH, Dempsey R, Reverchon F, Blumfield TJ, Ryan S, Cernusak LA (2017a) Effects of forest thinning on soil-plant carbon and nitrogen dynamics. Plant Soil 411:437–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bai SH, Trueman SJ, Nevenimo T, Hannet G, Bapiwai P, Poienou M, Wallace HM (2017b) Effects of shade-tree species and spacing on soil and leaf nutrient concentrations in cocoa plantations at 8 years after establishment. Agric Ecosyst Environ 246:134–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balieiro FDC, Pereira MG, Alves BJR, Resende ASD, Franco AA (2008) Soil carbon and nitrogen in pasture soil reforested with Eucalyptus and Guachapele. Rev Bras Ciênc Solo 32:1253–1260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bassiri RH, Constable JVH, Lussenhop J, Kimball BA, Norby RJ, Oechel WC, Reich PB, Schlesinger WH, Zitzer S, Sehtiya HL, Silim S (2003) Widespread foliage δ15N depletion under elevated CO2: inferences for the nitrogen cycle. Glob Chang Biol 9:1582–1590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bernhard-Reversat F (1996) Nitrogen cycling in tree plantations grown on a poor sandy savanna soil in Congo. Appl Soil Ecol 4:161–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Binkley D, Dunkin KA, DeBell D, Ryan MG (1992) Production and nutrient cycling in mixed plantations of Eucalyptus and Albizia in Hawaii. For Sci 38:393–408Google Scholar
  12. Blumfield TJ, Xu ZH, Saffigna PG (2004) Carbon and nitrogen dynamics under windrowed residues during the establishment phase of a second-rotation hoop pine plantation in subtropical Australia. For Ecol Manag 200:279–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blumfield TJ, Reverchon F, Vigulu VW (2018) The importance of market access for timber growers in Small Island developing states: a Solomon Island study. Land Use Policy 77:598–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bubb KA, Xu ZH, Simpson JA, Saffigna PG (1998) Some nutrient dynamics associated with litterfall and litter decomposition in hoop pine plantations of Southeast Queensland, Australia. For Ecol Manag 110:343–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bustamante MMC, Martinelli LA, Silva DA, Camargo PB, Klink CA, Domingues TF, Santos RV (2004) 15N natural abundance in woody plants and soils of central Brazilian savannas (Cerrado). Ecol Appl 14:200–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chapin FS, Kedrowski RA (1983) Seasonal changes in nitrogen and phosphorus fractions and autumn retranslocation in evergreen and deciduous taiga trees. Ecology 64:376–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Charles T, Garten J, Iversen CM, Norby RJ (2011) Litterfall 15N abundance indicates declining soil nitrogen availability in a free-air CO2 enrichment experiment. Ecology 92:133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cullen LE, Landman P, Grierson P (2008) Using stable isotopes to understand tree responses to environmental variation and stress. In: Management of agroforestry systems for enhancing resource use efficiency and crop productivity. Joint Food and Agriculture Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency, pp 43–64Google Scholar
  19. DeLucia EH, Schlesinger WH (1991) Resource-use efficiency and drought tolerance. In: Adjacent great basin and Sierran plants. Ecology 72:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Egunjobi JK (1974) Litter fall and mineralization in a teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) stand. Oikos 25:222–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fernández-Moya J, Alvarado A, Forsythe W, Ramírez L, Algeet-Abarquero N, Marchamalo-Sacristán M (2014) Soil erosion under teak (Tectona grandis Lf) plantations: general patterns, assumptions and controversies. Catena 123:236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fofana IJ, Lidah YJ, Diarrassouba N, N'guetta SPA, Sangare A, Verhaegen D (2008) Genetic structure and conservation of teak (Tectona grandis L. f.) plantations in Cote d’lvoire, revealed by site specific recombinase (SSR). Trop Conserv Sci 1:279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Forrester DI, Bauhus J, Cowie AL, Vanclay JK (2006) Mixed-species plantations of Eucalyptus with nitrogen-fixing trees: a review. For Ecol Manag 233:211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gardiner B, Berry P, Moulia B (2016) Wind impacts on plant growth, mechanics and damage. Plant Sci 245:94–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goulden ML, Miller SD, Da Rocha HR, Menton MC, de Freitas HC, de Sousa CAD (2004) Diel and seasonal patterns of tropical forest CO2 exchange. Ecol Appl 14:42–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hansell JRF, Wall JRD (1975) Land Resources of Solomon Islands 4:1–221Google Scholar
  27. Hermansah AZ, Tsugiyuki M, Toshiyuki W (2002) Litterfall and nutrient flux in tropical rain forest. West Sumatra, Indonesia, 17th WCSS, 14-21 Aug. 2002. Thailand. Symposium no 1125. Paper no 1125:1-9Google Scholar
  28. Hogberg P (1997) 15N natural abundance in soil-plant systems. New Phytol 137:179–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Högberg P, Johannisson C, Hällgren JE (1993) Studies of 13C in the foliage reveal interactions between nutrients and water in forest fertilization experiments. Plant Soil 152:207–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hogberg P, Johannisson C, Hogberg M, Hogbom L, Nasholm T, Hallgren JE (1995) Measurements of abundances of 15N and 13C as tools in retrospective studies of N balances and water stress in forests: a discussion of preliminary results. Plant Soil 168-169:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huang Z, Xu Z, Blumfield TJ, Bubb K (2008) Variations in relative stomatal and biochemical limitations to photosynthesis in a young blackbutt (Eucalyptus pilularis) plantation subjected to different weed control regimes. Tree Physiol 28:997–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ibell P, Xu Z, Blumfield T (2013) The influence of weed control on foliar δ15N, δ13C and tree growth in an 8 year-old exotic pine plantation of subtropical Australia. Plant Soil 369:199–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Imvitthaya C, Honda K, Lertlum S, Tangtham N (2011) Calibration of a biome-biogeochemical cycles model for modeling the net primary production of teak forests through inverse modeling of remotely sensed data. J Appl Remote Sens 5:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jha KK (2003) Temporal pattern of dry matter and nutrient dynamics in young teak plantations. XII World Forestry Congress, Quebec City, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  35. Johannisson C, Högberg P (1994) 15N abundance of soils and plants along an experimentally induced forest nitrogen supply gradient. Oecologia 97:322–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kocher SD, Harris R (2007) Forest stewardship series 5: tree growth and competition. University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, Communication Services, California, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  37. Kraenzel M, Castillo A, Moore T, Potvin C (2003) Carbon storage of harvest-age teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) plantations, Panama. For Ecol Manag 173:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kristiansen SM, Hansen EM, Jensen LS, Christensen BT (2005) Natural 13C abundance and carbon storage in Danish soils under continuous silage maize. Eur J Agron 22:107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lajtha K, Michener RH (1994) Stable isotopes in ecology and environmental science. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Liu R, Zhou X, Wang J, Shao J, Fu Y, Liang C, Yan E, Chen X, Wang X, Bai SH (2019) Differential magnitude of rhizosphere effects on soil aggregation at three stages of subtropical secondary forest successions. Plant Soil.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-019-03935-z
  41. Lorenzen MS, Bonilla JL, Potvin C (2007) Tree species richness affects litter production and decomposition rates in a tropical biodiversity experiment. Oikos 116:2108–2124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ma X, Heal KV, Liu A, Jarvis PG (2007) Nutrient cycling and distribution in different-aged plantations of Chinese fir in southern China. For Ecol Manag 243:61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mardegan SF, Nardoto GB, Higuchi N, Moreira MZ, Martinelli LA (2009) Nitrogen availability patterns in white-sand vegetations of Central Brazilian Amazon. Trees 23:479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Matson PA, Vitousek PM, Ewel JJ, Mazzarino MJ (1987) Nitrogen transformations following tropical forest felling and burning on a volcanic soil. Ecology 68:491–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McCarroll D, Loader N (2004) Stable isotopes in tree rings. Quat Sci Rev 23:771–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McClain K, Morris D, Hills S, Buse L (1994) The effects of initial spacing on growth and crown development for planted northern conifers: 37-year results. For Chron 70:174–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Montagnini F (2000) Accumulation in above-ground biomass and soil storage of mineral nutrients in pure and mixed plantations in a humid tropical lowland. For Ecol Manag 134:257–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nguyen TTN, Wallace HM, Xu C-Y, Xu Z, Farrar MB, Joseph S, Van Zwieten L, Bai SH (2017) Short-term effects of organo-mineral biochar and organic fertilisers on nitrogen cycling, plant photosynthesis, and nitrogen use efficiency. J Soils Sediments 17:2763–2774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ola-Adams BA, Egunjobi JK (1992) Effects of spacing on litterfall and nutrient contents in stands of Tectona grandis Linn. f. and Terminalia superba Engl. & Diels. Afr J Ecol 30:18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ometto JPHB, Ehleringer JR, Domingues TF, Berry JA, Ishida FY, Mazzi E, Higuchi N, Flanagan LB, Nardoto GB, Martinelli LA (2006) The stable carbon and nitrogen isotopic composition of vegetation in tropical forests of the Amazon Basin, Brazil. In: Martinelli LA, Howarth RW (eds) Nitrogen cycling in the Americas: natural and anthropogenic influences and controls. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  51. Pande PK, Meshram PB, Banerjee SK (2002) Litter production and nutrient return in tropical dry deciduous teak forests of Satpura plateau in Central India. Trop Ecol 43:337–344Google Scholar
  52. Polglase PJ, Attiwill PM (1992) Nitrogen and phosphorus cycling in relation to stand age of Eucalyptus regnans F. Muell. Plant Soil 142:157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Polyakova O, Billor N (2007) Impact of deciduous tree species on litterfall quality, decomposition rates and nutrient circulation in pine stands. For Ecol Manag 253:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pregitzer KS, Euskirchen ES (2004) Carbon cycling and storage in world forests: biome patterns related to forest age. Glob Chang Biol 10:2052–2077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Reverchon F, Bai SH, Liu X, Blumfield TJ (2015) Tree plantation systems influence nitrogen retention and the abundance of nitrogen functional genes in the Solomon Islands. Front Microbiol 6:1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rothe A, Binkley D (2001) Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: a synthesis. Can J For Res 31:1855–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rowe EC, Van Noordwijk M, Suprayogo D, Hairiah K, Giller KE, Cadisch G (2001) Root distributions partially explain 15N uptake patterns in gliricidia and peltophorum hedgerow intercropping systems. Plant Soil 235:167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sharma SC, Pande PK (1989) Patterns of litter nutrient concentration in some plantation ecosystems. For Ecol Manag 29:151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ssebulime G, Nyombi K, Kagezi GH, Mpiira S, Byabagambi S, Tushemereirwe WK, Kubiriba J, Karamura EB, Staver C (2018) Canopy management, leaf fall and litter quality of dominant tree species in the banana agroforestry system in Uganda. Afr J Food Agric Nutr Dev 18:13154–13170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Takahashi M, Marod D, Panuthai S, Hirai K (2012) Carbon cycling in teak plantations in comparison with seasonally dry tropical forests in Thailand. In: Forest ecosystems - more than just trees, Dr Juan a. Blanco (ed), ISBN: 978-953-51-0202-1Google Scholar
  61. Templer PH, Arthur MA, Lovett GM, Weathers KC (2007) Plant and soil natural abundance 15N: indicators of relative rates of nitrogen cycling in temperate forest ecosystems. Oecologia 153:399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tutua SS, Xu ZH, Blumfield TJ, Bubb KA (2008) Long-term impacts of harvest residue management on nutrition, growth and productivity of an exotic pine plantation of sub-tropical Australia. For Ecol Manag 256:741–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tutua SS, Xu Z, Blumfield TJ (2014) Foliar and litter needle carbon and oxygen isotope compositions relate to tree growth of an exotic pine plantation under different residue management regimes in subtropical Australia. Plant Soil 375:189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Veneklaas E (1991) Litterfall and nutrient fluxes in two montane tropical rain forests, Colombia. J Trop Ecol 7:309–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vigulu VW (2018) Mixed species and agroforestry system interactions in Solomon Islands. Griffith University, Australia, DissertationGoogle Scholar
  66. Vigulu VW, Blumfield TJ, Reverchon F, Xu ZH, Tutua SS (2017) Competition for nitrogen between trees in a mixed-species plantation in the Solomon Islands. Aust For 80:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vigulu V, Blumfield TJ, Reverchon F, Bai SH, Xu Z, (2018) Growth and yield of 5 years old teak and flueggea in single and mixed species forestry systems in the Solomon Islands. New Forests, pp 1-14Google Scholar
  68. Vitousek PM (1984) Litterfall, nutrient cycling, and nutrient limitation in tropical forests. Ecology 65:285–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vitousek PM, Sanford JRL (1986) Nutrient cycling in moist tropical forest. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17:137–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wilson J (1980) Macroscopic features of wind damage to leaves of Acer pseudoplatanus L. and its relationship with season, leaf age, and windspeed. Ann Bot 46:303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yang YS, Guo JF, Chen GS, Xie JS, Gao R, Li Z, Jin Z (2005) Litter production, seasonal pattern and nutrient return in seven natural forests compared with a plantation in southern China. Forestry 78:403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zhang D, Hui D, Luo Y, Zhou G (2008) Rates of litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: global patterns and controlling factors. J Plant Ecol 1:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vaeno Vigulu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Timothy J. Blumfield
    • 2
  • Frédérique Reverchon
    • 2
    • 3
  • Shahla Hosseini Bai
    • 4
    • 5
    Email author
  • Zhihong Xu
    • 2
  1. 1.Solomon Islands Government Ministry of Forestry Research, Geology AreaWest HoniaraSolomon Islands
  2. 2.Environmental Futures Research Institute, School of Natural SciencesGriffith UniversityGriffithAustralia
  3. 3.Red de Estudios Moleculares AvanzadosInstituto de Ecología A.CXalapaMexico
  4. 4.Genecology, Faculty of Science, Health, Education and EngineeringUniversity of the Sunshine CoastMaroochydoreAustralia
  5. 5.School of Health, Medical and Applied SciencesCentral Queensland UniversityBundabergAustralia

Personalised recommendations