Carbon allocation pattern in natural and managed forests as expressed by the ratio of BP to GPP
M. Campioli,S. Vicca,S. Luyssaert,J. Bilcke,E. Ceschia,F. S. Chapin,P. Ciais,M. Fernández-Martínez,Y. Malhi,M. Obersteiner,D. Olefeldt,D. Papale,S. L. Piao,J. Peñuelas,P. F. Sullivan,X. Wang,T. Zenone,I. A. Janssens
2015-01-01
Abstract:Plants acquire carbon through photosynthesis to sustain biomass production, autotrophic respiration and production of non-structural compounds for multiple purposes1. The fraction of photosynthetic production used for biomass production, the biomass production e ciency2, is a key determinant of the conversion of solar energy to biomass. In forest ecosystems, biomass production e ciency was suggested to be related to site fertility2. Here we present a database of biomass production e ciency from 131 sites compiled from individual studies using harvest, biometric, eddy covariance, or process-based model estimates of production. The database is global, but dominated by data from Europe and North America. We show that instead of site fertility, ecosystemmanagement is the key factor that controls biomass production e ciency in terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, in natural forests, grasslands, tundra, boreal peatlands and marshes, biomass production e ciency is independent of vegetation, environmental and climatic drivers. This similarity of biomass production e ciency across natural ecosystem types suggests that the ratio of biomass production to gross primary productivity is constant across natural ecosystems. We suggest that plant adaptation results in similar growth e ciency in highand low-fertility natural systems, but that nutrient influxes under managed conditions favour a shift to carbon investment from the belowground flux of non-structural compounds to aboveground biomass. The fraction of gross primary production (GPP) used for biomass production (BP) of terrestrial ecosystems has recently been coined biomass production efficiency (BPE; ref. 2). BPE is typically used as a proxy for the carbon-use efficiency or NPP-to-GPP ratio, where NPP refers to net primary production—that is, BP plus the production of non-structural organic compounds1. Current knowledge about BPE is mainly derived from research on forests. Earlier work reported BPE to be conservative across forests3, whereas more recent syntheses suggest high inter-site variability2,4. The variation in BPE was first attributed to vegetation properties (forest age) and climate variables4. More recently, it was shown that forest BPE in a range of natural and managed sites was correlated with site fertility, with management as a secondary BPE driver2. Fertility andmanagement are strongly correlated asmanagement enhances productivity by increasing plant-available resources, including nutrients. For instance, fertilization of grasslands directly increases the ecosystem nutrient stock, whereas forest thinning indirectly increases nutrient availability at the tree level by reducing plant–plant competition. In addition, fertile sites are more likely than infertile sites to be managed. Atmospheric deposition of nutrients, especially nitrogen (N), might further complicate the relationship between BPE, fertility and management. The influence of site fertility and management on BPE has not been disentangled in previous studies, and the impact of N deposition on BPE is largely overlooked. Here, we postulate that the impact of management on BPE is underestimated. In addition to a direct effect on BPE through selection of the most efficient plants2,5, management can indirectly affect BPE through effects on site fertility and related belowground dynamics2. Understanding of these dynamics not only will clarify the controls of BPE but also elucidate the human impacts on BPE. We compiled a new BPE data set comprising 131 sites, including forests, grasslands, croplands, wetlands (temperate marshes and boreal peatlands) and tundras (Methods). All major climatic zones (from polar to tropical) were represented, but managed sites were located almost entirely in the temperate and boreal zone of North America and Europe (Supplementary Fig. 1 and Supplementary Table 1). For each site, our data set also included vegetation characteristics, environmental data and information on anthropogenic impacts such as management and atmospheric N deposition (Supplementary Table 2).With regard tomanagement, we adopted a binary classification (Methods), distinguishing natural sites (pristine sites or sites with a low human impact that largely reproduced naturally occurring processes—for example, grasslands with low grazing) from managed sites (sites dominated by human activity with impacts that would not occur in nature— for example, newly established and fertilized grasslands). The utility of this classification was tested against more complex classifications