Nutrient effects on plant diversity loss arise from nutrient identity and decreasing niche dimension

IF 4.4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Ecology Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1002/ecy.4496
Yang Peng, Jianxia Yang, Eric W. Seabloom, Andrew R. Leitch, Ilia J. Leitch, Ruzhen Wang, Cunzheng Wei, Xingguo Han
{"title":"Nutrient effects on plant diversity loss arise from nutrient identity and decreasing niche dimension","authors":"Yang Peng,&nbsp;Jianxia Yang,&nbsp;Eric W. Seabloom,&nbsp;Andrew R. Leitch,&nbsp;Ilia J. Leitch,&nbsp;Ruzhen Wang,&nbsp;Cunzheng Wei,&nbsp;Xingguo Han","doi":"10.1002/ecy.4496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Two hypotheses have been used to explain the loss of plant diversity with nutrient addition. The nutrient identity hypothesis posits that biodiversity loss is due to a specific limiting nutrient, such as nitrogen (N) or phosphorus (P), while the niche dimension hypothesis posits that adding a larger number of limiting nutrients, regardless of their identity, results in biodiversity loss. These two hypotheses have not previously been tested together simultaneously. Here, we conduct that analysis to enable their relative effect sizes to be compared. We manipulated the supply of eight nutrients in the same experimental meadow grassland site to isolate the effects of the identity of added nutrients versus the number of added nutrients on biodiversity loss. We found support for both hypotheses, with the largest negative effects on biodiversity measures being due to N, or N and P treatment, with additional more minor effects of the number of added nutrients. Structural equation models (SEMs) suggested both identity and number of added nutrients had direct negative effects on biodiversity, likely caused by species' innate ability to competitively respond to nutrients, especially in response to disease, herbivory, and stress. SEMs also suggested indirect effects arising from nutrient-driven increases in aboveground biomass, which resulted in intensified competition for light and the competitive exclusion of short-statured species. These effects were exacerbated by the nutrients N and P which caused a shift in biomass accumulation from belowground to aboveground. The results highlight that a multi-nutrient perspective will improve our ability to effectively manage, monitor, and restore ecosystems.</p>","PeriodicalId":11484,"journal":{"name":"Ecology","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.4496","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Two hypotheses have been used to explain the loss of plant diversity with nutrient addition. The nutrient identity hypothesis posits that biodiversity loss is due to a specific limiting nutrient, such as nitrogen (N) or phosphorus (P), while the niche dimension hypothesis posits that adding a larger number of limiting nutrients, regardless of their identity, results in biodiversity loss. These two hypotheses have not previously been tested together simultaneously. Here, we conduct that analysis to enable their relative effect sizes to be compared. We manipulated the supply of eight nutrients in the same experimental meadow grassland site to isolate the effects of the identity of added nutrients versus the number of added nutrients on biodiversity loss. We found support for both hypotheses, with the largest negative effects on biodiversity measures being due to N, or N and P treatment, with additional more minor effects of the number of added nutrients. Structural equation models (SEMs) suggested both identity and number of added nutrients had direct negative effects on biodiversity, likely caused by species' innate ability to competitively respond to nutrients, especially in response to disease, herbivory, and stress. SEMs also suggested indirect effects arising from nutrient-driven increases in aboveground biomass, which resulted in intensified competition for light and the competitive exclusion of short-statured species. These effects were exacerbated by the nutrients N and P which caused a shift in biomass accumulation from belowground to aboveground. The results highlight that a multi-nutrient perspective will improve our ability to effectively manage, monitor, and restore ecosystems.

养分对植物多样性丧失的影响主要来自于养分同一性和生态位维数的降低。
有两种假说被用来解释植物多样性随着营养物质的增加而丧失。营养同一性假说认为生物多样性的丧失是由于特定的限制性营养物质,如氮(N)或磷(P),而生态位维度假说认为,添加大量的限制性营养物质,无论其同一性如何,都会导致生物多样性的丧失。这两种假设以前从未同时得到过检验。在这里,我们进行分析,使他们的相对效应大小进行比较。在同一试验点,通过控制8种营养物的供给,分离添加营养物种类与添加营养物数量对生物多样性损失的影响。我们发现这两种假设都得到了支持,对生物多样性测量的最大负面影响是由于N或N和P处理,添加营养物质的数量的额外影响较小。结构方程模型(sem)表明,添加营养物质的种类和数量对生物多样性有直接的负面影响,这可能是由于物种对营养物质的先天竞争性反应能力,特别是对疾病、草食和胁迫的反应。SEMs还表明,营养驱动的地上生物量增加会产生间接影响,导致对光的竞争加剧,矮小物种的竞争被排除在外。这些效应被氮和磷等养分加剧,导致生物量积累由地下向地上转移。研究结果表明,多养分视角将提高我们有效管理、监测和恢复生态系统的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecology
Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
332
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Ecology publishes articles that report on the basic elements of ecological research. Emphasis is placed on concise, clear articles documenting important ecological phenomena. The journal publishes a broad array of research that includes a rapidly expanding envelope of subject matter, techniques, approaches, and concepts: paleoecology through present-day phenomena; evolutionary, population, physiological, community, and ecosystem ecology, as well as biogeochemistry; inclusive of descriptive, comparative, experimental, mathematical, statistical, and interdisciplinary approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信