Effects of mycorrhizal types and shade tolerance of tree species on carbon storage of standing dead branches

Bu Wensheng; Ma Yaohua; Liu Hongbing; Zhang Cancan; Li Yuxin; Zeng Shiqi; Yang Shiyun

doi:10.12171/j.1000-1522.20220350

Journal of Beijing Forestry University > 2022 > 44(10): 85-92. > DOI: 10.12171/j.1000-1522.20220350

Bu Wensheng, Ma Yaohua, Liu Hongbing, Zhang Cancan, Li Yuxin, Zeng Shiqi, Yang Shiyun. Effects of mycorrhizal types and shade tolerance of tree species on carbon storage of standing dead branches[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2022, 44(10): 85-92. DOI: 10.12171/j.1000-1522.20220350

Citation:

PDF (816 KB)

Effects of mycorrhizal types and shade tolerance of tree species on carbon storage of standing dead branches

1.
Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Forest Ecosystem Protection and Restoration of Poyang Lake Watershed, College of Forestry, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045, Jiangxi, China
2.
Jiulianshan National Observation and Research Station of Chinese Forest Ecosystem, Nanchang 330045, Jiangxi, China
3.
Jiujiang Forestry Bureau, Jiujiang 332000, Jiangxi, China

More Information

Received Date: August 21, 2022
Revised Date: September 28, 2022
Accepted Date: October 07, 2022
Available Online: October 07, 2022
Published Date: October 24, 2022

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective Under the background of carbon neutrality, the carbon fixation capacity of forests has become the focus of attention. Previous studies have shown that tree diversity can increase biomass and carbon storage, and the main research focuses on the living body and soil of the forest. However, the impact mechanism of tree diversity on the biomass and carbon storage of standing dead branches is still unclear.
Method Based on the experimental research platform of subtropical forest biodiversity and ecosystem function in China (BEF China), this study aimed to explore the impact of tree species diversity on the carbon storage of standing dead branches by measuring the tree height, DBH and carbon storage of 12 tree species from different types under different diversity levels (1, 2, 4, 8).
Result Tree species types significantly affected the basal area, tree height and carbon storage of dead branches of different arbuscular mycorrhizal species (P < 0.01), and also significantly affected the NE (net effect), CE (compensation effect) and SE (selection effect) of carbon storage of dead branches (P < 0.05); Generally speaking, the fixed effects (plot diversity, basal area and tree height) and random effects (tree species) of arbuscular mycorrhizal and positive tree species explained more variation of carbon storage of dead branches and biodiversity effects (the average value was about 40%, and the minimum value was more than 32%); moreover, the net effect and compensation effect of dead branch carbon storage from arbuscular mycorrhizal species and positive species decreased with the increase of sample plot diversity (P < 0.05), while the ectomycorrhizal species and negative species were not affected by sample plot diversity.
Conclusion From the perspective of carbon sink of dead branches, the selection of different mycorrhizal types and shade tolerant tree species can significantly affect the carbon storage of standing dead branches. Meanwhile, planting more monoculture from arbuscular mycorrhizal species and intolerant species is beneficial to the formation of carbon sink of dead branches in subtropical forests.
- standing dead branch,
- carbon storage,
- tree species diversity,
- mycorrhizal type,
- shade-tolerant type

FullText(HTML)

References (38)

References

[1]	Naeem S, Duffy J E, Zavaleta E. The functions of biological diversity in an age of extinction[J]. Science, 2012, 336: 1401−1406. doi: 10.1126/science.1215855
[2]	Pan Y D, Richard A B, Fang J Y, et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests[J]. Science, 2011, 333: 988−993. doi: 10.1126/science.1201609
[3]	Onodera K, Sawako T. Do larger snags stand longer? Snag longevity in mixed conifer-hardwood forests in Hokkaido, Japan[J]. Annals of Forest Science, 2015, 72: 621−629. doi: 10.1007/s13595-015-0478-5
[4]	Pan Y D, Richard A B, Oliver L P, et al. The structure, distribution, and biomass of the world’s forests[J]. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 2013, 44: 593−622. doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135914
[5]	Loreau M, Andy H. Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments[J]. Nature, 2001, 412: 72−76. doi: 10.1038/35083573
[6]	Tilman D, Isbell F, Cowles J M. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning[J]. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 2014, 45: 471−493. doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091917
[7]	Valladares F, Niinemets Ü. Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences[J]. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 2008, 39: 237−257.
[8]	van der Heijden M G A, Martin F M, Selosse M A, et al. Mycorrhizal ecology and evolution: the past, the present, and the future[J]. New Phytologist, 2015, 205: 1406−1423. doi: 10.1111/nph.13288
[9]	Feng J, Zhu K, Cadotte M W, et al. Tree mycorrhizal type mediates the strength of negative density dependence in temperate forests[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2020, 108: 2601−2610. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13413
[10]	颉洪涛, 虞木奎, 成向荣. 光照强度变化对 5 种耐阴植物氮磷养分含量, 分配以及限制状况的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(5): 559−569. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0248 Xie H T, Yu M K, Cheng X R. Effects of light intensity variation on nitrogen and phosphorus contents, allocation and limitation in five shade-enduring plants[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2017, 41(5): 559−569. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0248
[11]	马钦洪, 李艳朋, 练琚愉, 等. 鼎湖山南亚热带常绿阔叶林不同树种存活对邻体组成的响应差异[J]. 生物多样性, 2018, 26(6): 535−544. doi: 10.17520/biods.2018056 Ma Q H, Li Y P, Lian J Y, et al. Difference in survival response of tree species to neighborhood crowding in a lower subtropical evergreen broad-leaved forest of Dinghushan[J]. Biodiversity Science, 2018, 26(6): 535−544. doi: 10.17520/biods.2018056
[12]	Canham C D, Finzi A C, Pacala S W, et al. Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests: interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees[J]. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1994, 24: 337−349. doi: 10.1139/x94-046
[13]	Gravel D, Canham C D, Beaudet M, et al. Shade tolerance, canopy gaps and mechanisms of coexistence of forest trees[J]. Oikos, 2010, 119: 475−484. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17441.x
[14]	Givnish T J. Adaptation to sun and shade: a whole-plant perspective[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 1988, 15: 63−92. doi: 10.1071/PP9880063
[15]	Reich P B, Wright I J, Cavender-Bares J, et al. The evolution of plant functional variation: traits, spectra, and strategies[J]. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 2003, 164: S143−S164. doi: 10.1086/374368
[16]	Aussenac R, Bergeron Y, Gravel D, et al. Interactions among trees: a key element in the stabilising effect of species diversity on forest growth[J]. Functional Ecology, 2019, 33: 360−367. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.13257
[17]	Bongers F J, Schmid B, Sun Z, et al. Growth–trait relationships in subtropical forest are stronger at higher diversity[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2020, 108: 256−266. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13242
[18]	Wang W, Lei X, Ma Z, et al. Positive relationship between aboveground carbon stocks and structural diversity in spruce-dominated forest stands in New Brunswick, Canada[J]. Forest Science, 2011, 57: 506−515.
[19]	Kraft N J B, Valencia R, Ackerly D D, et al. Functional traits and niche-based tree community assembly in an Amazonian forest[J]. Science, 2008, 322: 580−582. doi: 10.1126/science.1160662
[20]	Ali A, Yan E R, Chen H Y H, et al. Stand structural diversity rather than species diversity enhances aboveground carbon storage in secondary subtropical forests in Eastern China[J]. Biogeosciences, 2016, 13: 4627−4635. doi: 10.5194/bg-13-4627-2016
[21]	Dănescu A, Albrecht A T, Bauhus J. Structural diversity promotes productivity of mixed, uneven-aged forests in southwestern Germany[J]. Oecologia, 2016, 182: 319−333. doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3623-4
[22]	Zhang Y, Chen H Y H. Individual size inequality links forest diversity and above-ground biomass[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2015, 103: 1245−1252. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.12425
[23]	Yuan Z Q, Wang S P, Ali A, et al. Aboveground carbon storage is driven by functional trait composition and stand structural attributes rather than biodiversity in temperate mixed forests recovering from disturbances[J]. Annals of Forest Science, 2018, 75: 1−13. doi: 10.1007/s13595-017-0678-2
[24]	Binkley D, Stape J L, Bauerle W L, et al. Explaining growth of individual trees: light interception and efficiency of light use by Eucalyptus at four sites in Brazil[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, 259: 1704−1713. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.05.037
[25]	Soares A A V, Leite H G, Cruz J P. Development of stand structural heterogeneity and growth dominance in thinned Eucalyptus stands in Brazil[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2017, 384: 339−346. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2016.11.010
[26]	Clark J S. Individuals and the variation needed for high species diversity in forest trees[J]. Science, 2010, 327: 1129−1132.
[27]	Ma K P. Studies on biodiversity and ecosystem function via manipulation experi-ments[J]. Biodiversity Science, 2013, 21: 247. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1003.2013.02132
[28]	Bruelheide H, Nadrowski K, Assmann T, et al. Designing forest biodiversity experiments: general considerations illustrated by a new large experiment in subtropical China[J]. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2014, 5(1): 74−89. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12126
[29]	Lung M, Espira A. The influence of stand variables and human use on biomass and carbon stocks of a transitional African forest: implications for forest carbon projects[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2015, 351: 36−46. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.032
[30]	Lai J S, Zou Y, Zhang J L, et al. Generalizing hierarchical and variation partitioning in multiple regression and canonical analyses using the rdacca. hp R package[J]. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2022, 13: 782−788. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13800
[31]	欧阳园丽, 张参参, 林小凡, 等. 中国亚热带不同菌根树种的根叶形态学性状特征与生长差异: 以江西新岗山为例[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29: 746−758. doi: 10.17520/biods.2020368 Ouyang Y L, Zhang C C, Lin X F, et al. Growth differences and characteristics of root and leaf morphological traits for different mycorrhizal tree species in the subtropical China: a case study of Xingangshan, Jiangxi Province[J]. Biodiversity Science, 2021, 29: 746−758. doi: 10.17520/biods.2020368
[32]	黄小辉, 陈道静, 冯大兰. 不同基质条件下丛枝菌根真菌对桑树生长的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 62(3): 9−16. Huang X H, Chen D J, Feng D L. The effects of arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi on the growth of mulberry in different nursery substrates[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2019, 62(3): 9−16.
[33]	公绪云, 饶兴权, 周丽霞, 等. 尾叶桉林下5种植物的耐阴性、生物量及其个体消长[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(3): 1124−1133. Gong X Y, Rao X Q, Zhou L X, et al. Dynamics of shade tolerance, biomass, and individual growth of five understory plant species in Eucalyptus urophylla plantations[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(3): 1124−1133.
[34]	Averill C, Turner B L, Finzi A C. Mycorrhiza-mediated competition between plants and decomposers drives soil carbon storage[J]. Nature, 2014, 505: 543−545. doi: 10.1038/nature12901
[35]	Yan G, Bongers F J, Trogisch S, et al. Climate and mycorrhizae mediate the relationship of tree species diversity and carbon stocks in subtropical forests[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2022, 00: 1−13.
[36]	Chen A. Understanding the physiology and ecology of shade tolerance [D]. Princeton: Princeton University, 2009.
[37]	Keeling H C, Baker T R, Martinez R V, et al. Contrasting patterns of diameter and biomass increment across tree functional groups in Amazonian forests[J]. Oecologia, 2008, 158: 521−534. doi: 10.1007/s00442-008-1161-4
[38]	Ekblad A, Wallander H, Godbold D L, et al. The production and turnover of extramatrical mycelium of ectomycorrhizal fungi in forest soils: role in carbon cycling[J]. Plant and Soil, 2013, 6: 1−27.

[1]	Zhang Luyue, Liu Yanhong, Han Dongqing. Differences in growth and adaptive strategies between male and female plants of Cercidiphyllum japonicum[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2024, 46(12): 71-81. DOI: 10.12171/j.1000-1522.20230263
[2]	Jin Chuan, Zha Tianshan, Jia Xin, Tian Yun, Zhou Wenjun, Yang Shuangbao, Guo Zifan. Dynamics of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters under drought condition for three desert shrub species[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2020, 42(8): 72-80. DOI: 10.12171/j.1000-1522.20190316
[3]	HAN Jing, WU Yi, ZHAO Lin, AI Yun-bi, LIU Yan, GAO Rong-fu. Effects of photoperiod on the growth, flowering and chlorophyll fluorescence kinetics of forced Paeonia lactiflora.[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2015, 37(9): 62-69. DOI: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20140418
[4]	ZHAO Xi-yang, WANG Jun-hui, ZHANG Jin-feng, ZHANG Shou-gong, ZHANG Zeng-shun, MA Jian-wei, YUN Hui-ling, LI Kui-you. Variation analysis on chlorophyll fluorescence and growth traits of Catalpa bungei clones[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2012, 34(3): 41-47.
[5]	QIAN Yong-qiang, ZHOU Xiao-xing, HAN Lei, SUN Zhen-yuan, JU Guan-sheng. Rapid light-response curves of PSⅡ chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in the leaves of Salix babylonica, Salix ‘J172’ and Salix leucopithecia to Cd2+ stress[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2011, 33(6): 8-14.
[6]	CHEN Zhi-qiang, LI Qing-jian, SHI Rui-ting, ZHANG Jian-qiu, WANG Guo-zhu, ZHANG Yu-ling, LI Yue. Effects of soda salinealkaline stress on photosynthesis and growth of Nitraria sibirica[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2011, 33(3): 31-37.
[7]	HAO Jian-qing, LV Na, YANG Yang, LI Wen-hai, BAI Xue, ZHENG Cai-xia. Comparative study of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and water physiological characters of heteromorphic leaves for Populus euphratica[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2010, 32(5): 41-44.
[8]	YING Ye-qing, GUO Jing, WEI Jian-fen, ZOU Yi-qiao, HU Dong-chun, FANG Wei.. Photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescent responses of Phyllostachys pubescens seedlings to water deficiency stress.[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2009, 31(6): 128-133.
[9]	HUANG Hua-hong, CHEN Fen-xue, TONG Zai-kang, ZHU Yu-qiu.. Photosynthetic properties and chlorophyll florescence parameters of dwarf Chinese fir.[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2009, 31(2): 69-73.
[10]	DUAN Ai-guo, BAO Er-jiang, ZHANG Jian-guo, HE Cai-yun, SAI Li-ke, . Dynamic laws of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in needle leaves of different leaf ages and locations of Pinus armandii[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2008, 30(5): 26-32.

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(8)

1.	罗茂，关志华，颜幼春，柴莹莹，刘佳琪，张佳敏，王忠红. 模拟根际生境下青甘韭生长与品质的差异分析. 高原农业. 2025(01): 65-72+132 .
2.	黄小辉，吴焦焦，王玉书，冯大兰，孙向阳. 不同供氮水平的核桃幼苗生长及叶绿素荧光特性. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版). 2022(02): 119-126 .
3.	郑伟，师筝，龙美，廖允成. 黄绿叶突变体冀麦5265yg的光合生理特性分析. 中国农业科学. 2021(21): 4539-4551 .
4.	王佳敏，宋海燕，陈金艺，张静，李素慧，陶建平，刘锦春. 多年生黑麦草对干旱胁迫下喀斯特异质生境的生长响应策略. 生态学报. 2020(13): 4566-4572 .
5.	王生云，陶永明，司剑华. 不同配方轻基质对鳞皮云杉生长及光合参数的影响. 浙江林业科技. 2019(02): 50-55 .
6.	乐佳兴，田秋玲，吴焦焦，高岚，张文，刘芸. 无患子幼苗的生长和光合特性对重庆低山丘陵区不同生境的响应. 北京林业大学学报. 2019(06): 75-85 . 本站查看
7.	戴前莉，黄小辉，黄馨，唐龙波，朱恒星. 不同生境条件下凤丹生长及光合特性比较. 西南大学学报(自然科学版). 2018(09): 53-58 .
8.	陶永明，司剑华. 不同轻基质配方对川西云杉幼苗生长的影响. 浙江林业科技. 2017(04): 66-70 .

Other cited types(5)

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (545) PDF downloads (106) Cited by(13)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Effects of mycorrhizal types and shade tolerance of tree species on carbon storage of standing dead branches