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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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