Topic
Ecosystem
About: Ecosystem is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 25460 publications have been published within this topic receiving 1291375 citations. The topic is also known as: ecological system & Ecosystem.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University of Antwerp1, Oregon State University2, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli3, Max Planck Society4, University of New Hampshire5, Tuscia University6, University of Edinburgh7, University of Oxford8, University of Liège9, Dresden University of Technology10, University College Dublin11, Institut national de la recherche agronomique12, Tulane University13, University of Minnesota14, Pennsylvania State University15, VU University Amsterdam16, University of California, Irvine17, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences18, Oak Ridge National Laboratory19, United States Department of Agriculture20, Harvard University21, University of Helsinki22, Wageningen University and Research Centre23, Lund University24, Finnish Meteorological Institute25, University of Lisbon26, University of Milan27, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology28
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a comprehensive global database for forest ecosystems, which includes carbon budget variables (fluxes and stocks), ecosystem traits (e.g., leaf area index, age), as well as ancillary site information such as management regime, climate, and soil characteristics.
Abstract: Terrestrial ecosystems sequester 2.1 Pg of atmospheric carbon annually. A large amount of the terrestrial sink is realized by forests. However, considerable uncertainties remain regarding the fate of this carbon over both short and long timescales. Relevant data to address these uncertainties are being collected at many sites around the world, but syntheses of these data are still sparse. To facilitate future synthesis activities, we have assembled a comprehensive global database for forest ecosystems, which includes carbon budget variables (fluxes and stocks), ecosystem traits (e.g. leaf area index, age), as well as ancillary site information such as management regime, climate, and soil characteristics. This publicly available database can be used to quantify global, regional or biome-specific carbon budgets; to re-examine established relationships; to test emerging hypotheses about ecosystem functioning [e.g. a constant net ecosystem production (NEP) to gross primary production (GPP) ratio]; and as benchmarks for model evaluations. In this paper, we present the first analysis of this database. We discuss the climatic influences on GPP, net primary production (NPP) and NEP and present the CO2 balances for boreal, temperate, and tropical forest biomes based on micrometeorological, ecophysiological, and biometric flux and inventory estimates. Globally, GPP of forests benefited from higher temperatures and precipitation whereas NPP saturated above either a threshold of 1500 mm precipitation or a mean annual temperature of 10 degrees C. The global pattern in NEP was insensitive to climate and is hypothesized to be mainly determined by nonclimatic conditions such as successional stage, management, site history, and site disturbance. In all biomes, closing the CO2 balance required the introduction of substantial biome-specific closure terms. Nonclosure was taken as an indication that respiratory processes, advection, and non-CO2 carbon fluxes are not presently being adequately accounted for.
938 citations
••
TL;DR: Inspired by the importance of globally well-constrained carbon:nitrogen: phosphorus ratios in planktonic biomass to the understanding of nutrient cycles and biotic feedbacks in marine ecosystems, this work looked for analogous patterns in forest ecosystems worldwide and found that C:N:P ratios were as constrained as marine ratios and statistically distinct from one another.
Abstract: Inspired by the importance of globally well-constrained carbon:nitrogen: phosphorus (C:N:P) ratios in planktonic biomass to the understanding of nutrient cycles and biotic feedbacks in marine ecosystems, we looked for analogous patterns in forest ecosystems worldwide. We used data from the literature to examine the stoichiometry of C, N, and P in forest foliage and litter on both global and biome levels. Additionally, we examined the scaling of nutrient investments with biomass and production both globally and within biomes to determine if and when these ratios respond to macroscale ecosystem properties (such as nutrient availability). We found that, while global forest C:N:P ratios in both foliage and litter were more variable than those of marine particulate matter, biome level (temperate broadleaf, temperate coniferous, and tropical) ratios were as constrained as marine ratios and statistically distinct from one another. While we were more interested in the relative constancy of the C:N:P ratios than their numerical value we did note, as have others, that the atomic ratios calculated for foliage (1212:28:1) and litter (3007:45:1) reflect the increased proportion of C-rich structural material characteristic of terrestrial vegetation. Carbon : nutrient ratios in litter were consistently higher than in comparable foliar data sets, suggesting that resorption of nutrients is a globally important mechanism, particularly for P. Litter C:N ratios were globally constant despite biome-level differences in foliar C:N; we speculate that this strong coupling may be caused by the significant contribution of immobile cell wall bound proteins to the total foliar N pool. Most ratios scaled isometrically across the range of biomass stocks and production in all biomes sug- gesting that ratios arise directly from physiological constraints and are insensitive to factors leading to shifts in biomass and production. There were, however, important exceptions to this pattern: nutrient investment in broadleaf forest litter and coniferous forest foliage increased disproportionately relative to C with increasing biomass and production sug- gesting a systematic influence of macroscopic factors on ratios.
932 citations
••
920 citations
••
TL;DR: It is suggested that ecoenzymatic ratios reflect the equilibria between the elemental composition of microbial biomass and detrital organic matter and the efficiencies of microbial nutrient assimilation and growth.
Abstract: Biota can be described in terms of elemental composition, expressed as an atomic ratio of carbon:nitrogen:phosphorus (refs 1-3). The elemental stoichiometry of microoorganisms is fundamental for understanding the production dynamics and biogeochemical cycles of ecosystems because microbial biomass is the trophic base of detrital food webs. Here we show that heterotrophic microbial communities of diverse composition from terrestrial soils and freshwater sediments share a common functional stoichiometry in relation to organic nutrient acquisition. The activities of four enzymes that catalyse the hydrolysis of assimilable products from the principal environmental sources of C, N and P show similar scaling relationships over several orders of magnitude, with a mean ratio for C:N:P activities near 1:1:1 in all habitats. We suggest that these ecoenzymatic ratios reflect the equilibria between the elemental composition of microbial biomass and detrital organic matter and the efficiencies of microbial nutrient assimilation and growth. Because ecoenzymatic activities intersect the stoichiometric and metabolic theories of ecology, they provide a functional measure of the threshold at which control of community metabolism shifts from nutrient to energy flow.
917 citations
••
University of Minnesota1, Leipzig University2, University College Dublin3, Centre national de la recherche scientifique4, University of Zurich5, University of Bayreuth6, Iowa State University7, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg8, University of Jena9, Swansea University10, United States Department of Agriculture11, Utrecht University12, University of Oxford13, University of Greifswald14, Sewanee: The University of the South15, University of Bern16, Technische Universität München17, Yokohama National University18, Columbia University19, University of Western Sydney20, Colorado State University21, University of California, Santa Barbara22, Virginia Tech23, Wageningen University and Research Centre24
TL;DR: Biodiversity mainly stabilizes ecosystem productivity, and productivity-dependent ecosystem services, by increasing resistance to climate events, and restoration of biodiversity to increase it, mainly by changing the resistance of ecosystem productivity toClimate events.
Abstract: It remains unclear whether biodiversity buffers ecosystems against climate extremes, which are becoming increasingly frequent worldwide1. Early results suggested that the ecosystem productivity of diverse grassland plant communities was more resistant, changing less during drought, and more resilient, recovering more quickly after drought, than that of depauperate communities2. However, subsequent experimental tests produced mixed results3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. Here we use data from 46 experiments that manipulated grassland plant diversity to test whether biodiversity provides resistance during and resilience after climate events. We show that biodiversity increased ecosystem resistance for a broad range of climate events, including wet or dry, moderate or extreme, and brief or prolonged events. Across all studies and climate events, the productivity of low-diversity communities with one or two species changed by approximately 50% during climate events, whereas that of high-diversity communities with 16–32 species was more resistant, changing by only approximately 25%. By a year after each climate event, ecosystem productivity had often fully recovered, or overshot, normal levels of productivity in both high- and low-diversity communities, leading to no detectable dependence of ecosystem resilience on biodiversity. Our results suggest that biodiversity mainly stabilizes ecosystem productivity, and productivity-dependent ecosystem services, by increasing resistance to climate events. Anthropogenic environmental changes that drive biodiversity loss thus seem likely to decrease ecosystem stability14, and restoration of biodiversity to increase it, mainly by changing the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate events.
917 citations