Cargando…
Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau
Aboveground biomass (AGB) and belowground biomass (BGB) allocation and productivity–richness relationship are controversial. Here, we assessed AGB and BGB allocation and the productivity–richness relationship at community level across four grassland types based on the biomass data collected from 80...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972799/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31988738 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5920 |
_version_ | 1783489909394243584 |
---|---|
author | Dai, Licong Guo, Xiaowei Ke, Xun Lan, Yuting Zhang, Fawei Li, Yikang Lin, Li Li, Qian Cao, Guangmin Fan, Bo Qian, Dawen Zhou, Huakun Du, Yangong |
author_facet | Dai, Licong Guo, Xiaowei Ke, Xun Lan, Yuting Zhang, Fawei Li, Yikang Lin, Li Li, Qian Cao, Guangmin Fan, Bo Qian, Dawen Zhou, Huakun Du, Yangong |
author_sort | Dai, Licong |
collection | PubMed |
description | Aboveground biomass (AGB) and belowground biomass (BGB) allocation and productivity–richness relationship are controversial. Here, we assessed AGB and BGB allocation and the productivity–richness relationship at community level across four grassland types based on the biomass data collected from 80 sites across the Qinghai Plateau during 2011–2012. The reduced major axis regression and general linear models were used and showed that (a) the median values of AGB were significantly higher in alpine meadow than in other three grassland types; the ratio of root to shoot (R/S) was significantly higher in desert grassland (36.06) than intemperate grassland (16.60), alpine meadow (13.35), and meadow steppe (19.46). The temperate grassland had deeper root distribution than the other three grasslands, with about 91.45% roots distributed in the top 30 cm soil layer. (b) The slopes between log AGB and log BGB in the temperate grassland and meadow steppe were 1.09 and 1, respectively, whereas that in the desert grassland was 1.12, which was significantly different from the isometric allocation relationship. A competitive relationship between AGB and BGB was observed in the alpine meadow with a slope of −1.83, indicating a trade‐off between AGB and BGB in the alpine meadow. (c) A positive productivity–richness relationship existed across the four grassland types, suggesting that the positive productivity–richness relationship might not be affected by the environmental factors at the plant location. Our results provide a new insight for biomass allocation and biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6972799 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69727992020-01-27 Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau Dai, Licong Guo, Xiaowei Ke, Xun Lan, Yuting Zhang, Fawei Li, Yikang Lin, Li Li, Qian Cao, Guangmin Fan, Bo Qian, Dawen Zhou, Huakun Du, Yangong Ecol Evol Original Research Aboveground biomass (AGB) and belowground biomass (BGB) allocation and productivity–richness relationship are controversial. Here, we assessed AGB and BGB allocation and the productivity–richness relationship at community level across four grassland types based on the biomass data collected from 80 sites across the Qinghai Plateau during 2011–2012. The reduced major axis regression and general linear models were used and showed that (a) the median values of AGB were significantly higher in alpine meadow than in other three grassland types; the ratio of root to shoot (R/S) was significantly higher in desert grassland (36.06) than intemperate grassland (16.60), alpine meadow (13.35), and meadow steppe (19.46). The temperate grassland had deeper root distribution than the other three grasslands, with about 91.45% roots distributed in the top 30 cm soil layer. (b) The slopes between log AGB and log BGB in the temperate grassland and meadow steppe were 1.09 and 1, respectively, whereas that in the desert grassland was 1.12, which was significantly different from the isometric allocation relationship. A competitive relationship between AGB and BGB was observed in the alpine meadow with a slope of −1.83, indicating a trade‐off between AGB and BGB in the alpine meadow. (c) A positive productivity–richness relationship existed across the four grassland types, suggesting that the positive productivity–richness relationship might not be affected by the environmental factors at the plant location. Our results provide a new insight for biomass allocation and biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6972799/ /pubmed/31988738 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5920 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Dai, Licong Guo, Xiaowei Ke, Xun Lan, Yuting Zhang, Fawei Li, Yikang Lin, Li Li, Qian Cao, Guangmin Fan, Bo Qian, Dawen Zhou, Huakun Du, Yangong Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title | Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title_full | Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title_fullStr | Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title_full_unstemmed | Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title_short | Biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the Qinghai Plateau |
title_sort | biomass allocation and productivity–richness relationship across four grassland types at the qinghai plateau |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972799/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31988738 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5920 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dailicong biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT guoxiaowei biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT kexun biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT lanyuting biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT zhangfawei biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT liyikang biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT linli biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT liqian biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT caoguangmin biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT fanbo biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT qiandawen biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT zhouhuakun biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau AT duyangong biomassallocationandproductivityrichnessrelationshipacrossfourgrasslandtypesattheqinghaiplateau |