Benton N. Taylor, Angelica E. Patterson, Moyosore Ajayi, Rachel Arkebauer, Karen Bao, Natalie Bray, Robert M. Elliott, Paul P.G. Gauthier, Jessica Gersony, Rebecca Gibson, Marceau Guerin, Sara Lavenhar, Caroline Leland, Leo Lemordant, Wenying Liao, Jerry Melillo, Ruth Oliver, Case M. Prager, William Schuster, Naomi B. Schwartz, Christa Shen, Katherine Pavlis Terlizzi, and Kevin L. Griffin. 2017. “
Growth and physiology of a dominant understory shrub, Hamamelis virginiana, following canopy disturbance in a temperate hardwood forest.” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 47, 2, Pp. 193-202.
Publisher's VersionAbstractAs global climatic changes increase plant susceptibility to large-scale disturbances such as drought and pathogens, understory responses to these disturbances will become increasingly important to long-term forest dynamics. To better understand understory responses to canopy disturbance, we measured changes in the growth and physiology of the dominant understory shrub, American witch-hazel (Hamamelis virginiana L.), in response to girdling of canopy oaks in a temperate hardwood forest of the northeastern United States. Changes in the growth and physiology of H. virginiana may be important to the regeneration of northeastern temperate forests, as this common shrub largely shapes the microenvironment for seedlings on the forest floor where it occurs. Canopy disturbance by girdling resulted in significant increases in light and soil nitrogen availability. In response to these environmental changes, basal-area growth of H. virginiana increased by an average 334%. This growth increase corresponded to significant increases in foliar nitrogen, respiration, and leaf chlorophyll and carotenoid concentrations. These findings indicate improved environmental conditions and increased growth for this understory shrub following the loss of dominant canopy trees. This study suggests that following large-scale canopy disturbance, H. virginiana and shrubs like it may play an important role in competing for soil N and shading seedlings of regenerating canopy species.
Benton N. Taylor, Robin L. Chazdon, Benedicte Bachelot, and Duncan N.L. Menge. 2017. “
Nitrogen-fixing trees inhibit growth of regenerating Costa Rican rainforests.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 33, Pp. 8817-8822.
Publisher's VersionAbstractMore than half of the world’s tropical forests are currently recovering from human land use, and this regenerating biomass now represents the largest carbon (C)-capturing potential on Earth. How quickly these forests regenerate is now a central concern for both conservation and global climate-modeling efforts. Symbiotic nitrogen-fixing trees are thought to provide much of the nitrogen (N) required to fuel tropical secondary regrowth and therefore to drive the rate of forest regeneration, yet we have a poor understanding of how these N fixers influence the trees around them. Do they promote forest growth, as expected if the new N they fix facilitates neighboring trees? Or do they suppress growth, as expected if competitive inhibition of their neighbors is strong? Using 17 consecutive years of data from tropical rainforest plots in Costa Rica that range from 10 y since abandonment to old-growth forest, we assessed how N fixers influenced the growth of forest stands and the demographic rates of neighboring trees. Surprisingly, we found no evidence that N fixers facilitate biomass regeneration in these forests. At the hectare scale, plots with more N-fixing trees grew slower. At the individual scale, N fixers inhibited their neighbors even more strongly than did nonfixing trees. These results provide strong evidence that N-fixing trees do not always serve the facilitative role to neighboring trees during tropical forest regeneration that is expected given their N inputs into these systems.
Duncan N.L. Menge, Sarah A. Batterman, Wenying Liao, Benton N. Taylor, Jeremy W. Lichstein, and Gregorio Angeles-Perez. 2017. “
Nitrogen‐fixing tree abundance in higher‐latitude North America is not constrained by diversity.” Ecology Letters, 20, 7, Pp. 842-851.
Publisher's VersionAbstractThe rarity of nitrogen (N)‐fixing trees in frequently N‐limited higher‐latitude (here, > 35°) forests is a central biogeochemical paradox. One hypothesis for their rarity is that evolutionary constraints limit N‐fixing tree diversity, preventing N‐fixing species from filling available niches in higher‐latitude forests. Here, we test this hypothesis using data from the USA and Mexico. N‐fixing trees comprise only a slightly smaller fraction of taxa at higher vs. lower latitudes (8% vs. 11% of genera), despite 11‐fold lower abundance (1.2% vs. 12.7% of basal area). Furthermore, N‐fixing trees are abundant but belong to few species on tropical islands, suggesting that low absolute diversity does not limit their abundance. Rhizobial taxa dominate N‐fixing tree richness at lower latitudes, whereas actinorhizal species do at higher latitudes. Our results suggest that low diversity does not explain N‐fixing trees' rarity in higher‐latitude forests. Therefore, N limitation in higher‐latitude forests likely results from ecological constraints on N fixation.
Duncan N.L. Menge, Sarah A. Batterman, Lars O. Hedin, Wenying Liao, Stephen W. Pacala, and Benton N. Taylor. 2017. “
Why are nitrogen‐fixing trees rare at higher compared to lower latitudes?” Ecology, 98, 12, Pp. 3127-3140.
Publisher's VersionAbstractSymbiotic nitrogen (N) fixation provides a dominant source of new N to the terrestrial biosphere, yet in many cases the abundance of N‐fixing trees appears paradoxical. N‐fixing trees, which should be favored when N is limiting, are rare in higher latitude forests where N limitation is common, but are abundant in many lower latitude forests where N limitation is rare. Here, we develop a graphical and mathematical model to resolve the paradox. We use the model to demonstrate that N fixation is not necessarily cost effective under all degrees of N limitation, as intuition suggests. Rather, N fixation is only cost effective when N limitation is sufficiently severe. This general finding, specific versions of which have also emerged from other models, would explain sustained moderate N limitation because N‐fixing trees would either turn N fixation off or be outcompeted under moderate N limitation. From this finding, four general hypothesis classes emerge to resolve the apparent paradox of N limitation and N‐fixing tree abundance across latitude. The first hypothesis is that N limitation is less common at higher latitudes. This hypothesis contradicts prevailing evidence, so is unlikely, but the following three hypotheses all seem likely. The second hypothesis, which is new, is that even if N limitation is more common at higher latitudes, more severe N limitation might be more common at lower latitudes because of the capacity for higher N demand. Third, N fixation might be cost effective under milder N limitation at lower latitudes but only under more severe N limitation at higher latitudes. This third hypothesis class generalizes previous hypotheses and suggests new specific hypotheses. For example, greater trade‐offs between N fixation and N use efficiency, soil N uptake, or plant turnover at higher compared to lower latitudes would make N fixation cost effective only under more severe N limitation at higher latitudes. Fourth, N‐fixing trees might adjust N fixation more at lower than at higher latitudes. This framework provides new hypotheses to explain the latitudinal abundance distribution of N‐fixing trees, and also provides a new way to visualize them. Therefore, it can help explain the seemingly paradoxical persistence of N limitation in many higher latitude forests.