Lifespan and morphological traits of absorptive fine roots across six typical tree species in subtropical China

doi:10.17521/cjpe.2021.0001

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims Root turnover is a primary driver of belowground ecological processes, and root functional traits can indicate species ecological strategies, hence root lifespan and morphological traits are essential for understanding ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycling as well as community diversity. Yet, data on root ecological processes in subtropical evergreen forest is very rare.

Methods We observed root dynamics of six tree species across root orders for two years in an experimental forest farm in Zhangshu, Jiangxi Province. Based on 28 000 minirhizotron photos, we analyzed interannual and seasonal changes of absorptive fine roots in relation to both lifespan and morphology.

Important findings 1) The variation of root lifespan among the six species in subtropical forest was as high as 4.6-fold, the variation of coefficient was 73%, with median lifespan in the sequence of: Taxus wallichiana(426 d) > Koelreuteria bipinnata (155 d) > Nageia nagi(145 d) > Cinnamomum camphora (126 d) > Cerasus yedoensis (93 d) > Michelia maudiae (92 d); 2) Absorptive fine root lifespan appeared remarkable in both seasonal and interannual variations, a pattern seemingly related to the monsoon climate which is characterized by summer-to- autumn drought and the supplies of soil water resources; 3) The lifespan of absorptive roots was positively associated with diameter, but negatively correlated with specific root length, suggesting that the root construction cost is a key predictor of lifespan. These results provide parameters for modeling belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling processes in subtropical evergreen broadleaf forest, and pave the way for exploring species coexistence mechanisms from belowground.

Key words: fine root, absorptive root, root turnover, root productivity, root mortality, belowground ecological process, morphological trait, net primary productivity, soil organic carbon

WANG Yi-Dan, LI Liang, LIU Qi-Jing, MA Ze-Qing. Lifespan and morphological traits of absorptive fine roots across six typical tree species in subtropical China[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2021, 45(4): 383-393.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.17521/cjpe.2021.0001

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2021/V45/I4/383

Figures/Tables 7

References 56

[1]	Abramoff RZ, Finzi AC (2015). Are above- and below-ground phenology in sync? New Phytologist, 205, 1054-1061. DOI URL
[2]	Aerts R (1995). The advantages of being evergreen. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 10, 402-407. DOI URL
[3]	Bai WM, Zhou M, Fang Y, Zhang WH (2017). Differences in spatial and temporal root lifespan of three Stipa grasslands in northern China. Biogeochemistry, 132, 293-306. DOI URL
[4]	Bauhus J, Messier C (1999). Evaluation of fine root length and diameter measurements obtained using RHIZO image analysis. Agronomy Journal, 91, 142-147. DOI URL
[5]	Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL (2000). Relationships between fine root dynamics and nitrogen availability in Michigan northern hardwood forests. Oecologia, 125, 389-399. DOI PMID
[6]	Comas LH, Bouma TJ, Eissenstat DM (2002). Linking root traits to potential growth rate in six temperate tree species. Oecologia, 132, 34-43. DOI PMID
[7]	Comas LH, Callahan HS, Midford PE (2014). Patterns in root traits of woody species hosting arbuscular and ectomycorrhizas: implications for the evolution of belowground strategies. Evolutionary and Ecology, 4, 2979-2990. DOI URL
[8]	Comas LH, Eissenstat DM (2004). Linking fine root traits to maximum potential growth rate among 11 mature temperate tree species. Functional Ecology, 18, 388-397. DOI URL
[9]	Courchesne DN, Wilson AZ, Ryser P (2020). Regional distribution patterns of wetland monocots with different root turnover strategies are associated with local variation in soil temperature. New Phytologist, 226, 86-97. DOI
[10]	Eissenstat DM (1997). Trade-offs in root form and function //Jackson LE. Ecology in Agriculture. Academic Press, San Diego,USA. 173-199.
[11]	Eissenstat DM, Wells CE, Yanai RD, Whitbeck JL (2000). Building roots in a changing environment: implications for root longevity. New Phytologist, 147, 33-42. DOI URL
[12]	Eissenstat DM, Yanai RD (1997). The ecology of root lifespan. Advances in Ecological Research, 27, 1-60.
[13]	Fan PP, Guo DL (2010). Slow decomposition of lower order roots: a key mechanism of root carbon and nutrient retention in the soil. Oecologia, 163, 509-515. DOI URL
[14]	Freschet GT, Cornelissen JHC, van Logtestijn RSP, Aerts R (2010). Evidence of the “plant economics spectrum” in a subarctic flora. Journal of Ecology, 98, 362-373. DOI URL
[15]	Gaudinski J, Trumbore S, Davidson E, Cook A, Markewitz D, Richter D (2001). The age of fine-root carbon in three forests of the eastern United States measured by radiocarbon. Oecologia, 129, 420-429. DOI PMID
[16]	Gordon WS, Jackson RB (2000). Nutrient concentrations in fine roots. Ecology, 81, 275-280. DOI URL
[17]	Gu JC, Wang Y, Fahey TJ, Wang ZQ (2017). Effects of root diameter, branch order, soil depth and season of birth on fine root life span in five temperate tree species. European Journal of Forest Research, 136, 727-738. DOI URL
[18]	Guo DL, Li H, Mitchell RJ, Han WX, Hendricks JJ, Fahey TJ, Hendrick RL (2008a). Fine root heterogeneity by branch order: exploring the discrepancy in root turnover estimates between minirhizotron and carbon isotopic methods. New Phytologist, 177, 443-456. DOI URL
[19]	Guo DL, Xia MX, Wei X, Chang WJ, Liu Y, Wang ZQ (2008b). Anatomical traits associated with absorption and mycorrhizal colonization are linked to root branch order in twenty-three Chinese temperate tree species. New Phytologist, 180, 673-683. DOI URL
[20]	Hansson K, Helmisaari HS, Sah SP, Lange H (2013). Fine root production and turnover of tree and understorey vegetation in Scots pine, silver birch and Norway spruce stands in SW Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management, 309, 58-65. DOI URL
[21]	Huang JX, Ling H, Yang ZJ, Lu ZL, Xiong DC, Chen GS, Yang YS ( 2012). Fine root longevity and controlling factors in subtropical Altingia grlilipes and Castanopsis carlesii forests . Acta Ecologica Sinica, 32, 1932-1942. DOI URL
	[ 黄锦学, 凌华, 杨智杰, 卢正立, 熊德成, 陈光水, 杨玉盛 ( 2012). 细柄阿丁枫和米槠细根寿命影响因素. 生态学报, 32, 1932-1942.]
[22]	Huo CF, Cheng WX (2019). Improved root turnover assessment using field scanning rhizotrons with branch order analysis. Ecosphere, 10, e02793. DOI: 10.1002/ecs2.2793. DOI URL
[23]	Iversen CM (2014). Using root form to improve our understanding of root function. New Phytologist, 203, 707-709. DOI URL
[24]	Jackson RB, Mooney HA, Schulze ED (1997). A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94, 7362-7366. PMID
[25]	Kajimoto T (2010). Root system development of larch trees growing on siberian permafrost. Permafrost Ecosystems, 209, 303-330.
[26]	Kong DL, Ma CG, Zhang Q, Li L, Chen XY, Zeng H, Guo DL (2014). Leading dimensions in absorptive root trait variation across 96 subtropical forest species. New Phytologist, 203, 863-872. DOI URL
[27]	Liljeroth E, Bryngelsson T (2001). DNA fragmentation in cereal roots indicative of programmed root cortical cell death. Physiologia Plantarum, 111, 365-372. DOI URL
[28]	Ling H, Yuan YD, Yang ZJ, Huang JX, Chen GS, Yang YS ( 2011). Influencing factors of fine root lifespans in two Chinese fir plantations in subtropical China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31, 1130-1138.
	[ 凌华, 袁一丁, 杨智杰, 黄锦学, 陈光水, 杨玉盛 ( 2011). 杉木人工林细根寿命的影响因素. 生态学报, 31, 1130-1138.]
[29]	Liu BT, Li HB, Zhu B, Koide RT, Eissenstat DM, Guo DL (2015). Complementarity in nutrient foraging strategies of absorptive fine roots and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi across 14 coexisting subtropical tree species. New Phytologist, 208, 125-136. DOI URL
[30]	Liu XJ, Trogisch S, He JS, Niklaus PA, Bruelheide H, Tang ZY, Erfmeier A, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Pietsch KA, Yang B, Kühn P, Scholten T, Huang YY, Wang C, Staab M, Leppert KN, Wirth C, Schmid B, Ma KP (2018). Tree species richness increases ecosystem carbon storage in subtropical forests. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285, 1240.
[31]	Ma ZQ, Guo DL, Xu XL, Lu MZ, Bardgett RD, Eissenstat DM, McCormack ML, Hedin LO (2018). Evolutionary history resolves global organization of root functional traits. Nature, 555, 94-97. DOI URL
[32]	Majdi H, Damm E, Nylund JE (2001). Longevity of mycorrhizal roots depends on branching order and nutrient availability. New Phytologist, 150, 195-202. DOI URL
[33]	McCormack ML, Adams TS, Smithwick EAH, Eissenstat DM (2012). Predicting fine root lifespan from plant functional traits in temperate trees. New Phytologist, 195, 823-831. DOI URL
[34]	McCormack ML, Dickie IA, Eissenstat DM, Fahey TJ, Fernandez CW, Guo DL, Helmisaari HS, Hobbie EA, Iversen CM, Jackson RB, Leppälammi-Kujansuu J, Norby RJ, Phillips RP, Pregitzer KS, Pritchard SG, Rewald B, Zadworny M (2015). Redefining fine roots improves understanding of below-ground contributions to terrestrial biosphere processes. New Phytologist, 207, 505-518. DOI URL
[35]	McCormack ML, Guo DL (2014). Impacts of environmental factors on fine root lifespan. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5, 205. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00205. DOI PMID
[36]	Niinemets Ü, Ostonen I (2020). Plant organ senescence above- and belowground in trees: How to best salvage resources for new growth? Tree Physiology, 40, 981-986. DOI PMID
[37]	Norby RJ, Ledford J, Reilly CD, Miller NE, O’Neill EG (2004). Fine-root production dominates response of a deciduous forest to atmospheric CO₂ enrichment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 9689-9693.
[38]	Poorter H, Niklas KJ, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Poot P, Mommer L (2012). Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. New Phytologist, 193, 30-50. DOI URL
[39]	Pregitzer KS, DeForest JL, Burton AJ, Allen MF, Ruess RW, Hendrick RL (2002). Fine root architecture of nine North American trees. Ecological Monographs, 72, 293-309. DOI URL
[40]	Radville L, McCormack ML, Post E, Eissenstat DM (2016). Root phenology in a changing climate. Journal of Experimental Botany, 67, 3617-3628. DOI PMID
[41]	Reich PB (2014). The world-wide “fast-slow” plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto. Journal of Ecology, 102, 275-301. DOI URL
[42]	Roumet C, Urcelay C, Díaz S (2006). Suites of root traits differ between annual and perennial species growing in the field. New Phytologist, 170, 357-368. DOI URL
[43]	Ryser P (1996). The importance of tissue density for growth and life span of leaves and roots: a comparison of five ecologically contrasting grasses. Functional Ecology, 10, 717. DOI URL
[44]	Sun K, McCormack ML, Li L, Ma ZQ, Guo DL (2016). Fast-cycling unit of root turnover in perennial herbaceous plants in a cold temperate ecosystem. Scientific Reports, 6, 19698. DOI: 10.1038/srep19698. DOI URL
[45]	Tierney GL, Fahey TJ (2001). Evaluating minirhizotron estimates of fine root longevity and production in the forest floor of a temperate broadleaf forest. Plant and Soil, 229, 167-176. DOI URL
[46]	Warren JM, Hanson PJ, Iversen CM, Kumar J, Walker AP, Wullschleger SD (2015). Root structural and functional dynamics in terrestrial biosphere models: evaluation and recommendations. New Phytologist, 205, 59-78. DOI URL
[47]	Weemstra M, Kiorapostolou N, van Ruijven J, Mommer L, de Vries J, Sterck F (2020). The role of fine-root mass, specific root length and life span in tree performance: a whole-tree exploration. Functional Ecology, 34, 575-585. DOI URL
[48]	Weemstra M, Mommer L, Visser EJW, van Ruijven J, Kuyper TW, Mohren GMJ, Sterck FJ (2016). Towards a multidimensional root trait framework: a tree root review. New Phytologist, 211, 1159-1169. DOI URL
[49]	Wells CE, Glenn DM, Eissenstat DM (2002). Changes in the risk of fine-root mortality with age: a case study in peach, Prunus persica (Rosaceae). American Journal of Botany, 89, 79-87. DOI URL
[50]	Withington JM, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Eissenstat DM (2006). Comparisons of structure and life span in roots and leaves among temperate trees. Ecological Monographs, 76, 381-397. DOI URL
[51]	Wu C, Wang ZQ, Fan ZQ ( 2004). Significance of senescence study on tree roots and its advances. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 15, 1276-1280.
	[ 吴楚, 王政权, 范志强 ( 2004). 树木根系衰老研究的意义与现状. 应用生态学报, 15, 1276-1280.]
[52]	Xia MX, Guo DL, Pregitzer KS (2010). Ephemeral root modules in Fraxinus mandshurica. New Phytologist, 188, 1065-1074. DOI URL
[53]	Yu GR, Chen Z, Piao SL, Peng CH, Ciais P, Wang QF, Li XR, Zhu XJ (2014). High carbon dioxide uptake by subtropical forest ecosystems in the East Asian monsoon region. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111, 4910-4915.
[54]	Yu SQ, Wang JB, Hao QW, Wang WF, Wang Q, Zhan LF ( 2020). Fine root lifespan and influencing factors of four tree species with different life forms. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40, 3040-3047.
	[ 于水强, 王静波, 郝倩葳, 王维枫, 王琪, 詹龙飞 ( 2020). 四种不同生活型树种细根寿命及影响因素. 生态学报, 40, 3040-3047.]
[55]	Zadworny M, McCormack ML, Żytkowiak R, Karolewski P, Mucha J, Oleksyn J (2017). Patterns of structural and defense investments in fine roots of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) across a strong temperature and latitudinal gradient in Europe. Global Change Biology, 23, 1218-1231. DOI PMID
[56]	Zheng JX, Huang JX, Wang ZZ, Xiong DC, Yang ZJ, Chen GS ( 2012). Fine root longevity and controlling factors in aPhoebe bournei plantation . Acta Ecologica Sinica, 32, 7532-7539. DOI URL
	[ 郑金兴, 黄锦学, 王珍珍, 熊德成, 杨智杰, 陈光水 ( 2012). 闽楠人工林细根寿命及其影响因素. 生态学报, 32, 7532-7539.]

树种 Tree species	中值寿命 Median lifespan	95%置信区间		平均寿命 Mean lifespan	观测细根数 Number observed	删失细根数 Number censored
树种 Tree species	中值寿命 Median lifespan	LCL	UCL	平均寿命 Mean lifespan	观测细根数 Number observed	删失细根数 Number censored
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	426 ± 103 ^d	242	426	417 ± 21 ^d	31	17
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	155 ± 35 ^c	153	175	216 ± 4 ^bc	1 745	488
竹柏 Nageia nagi	145 ± 20 ^bc	128	154	178 ± 7 ^b	436	102
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	126 ± 11 ^ab	105	188	179 ± 12 ^b	128	54
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	93 ± 7 ^a	93	96	126 ± 3 ^a	772	155
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	92 ± 63 ^ab	92	120	180 ± 9 ^b	444	192

树种 Tree species	中值寿命 Median lifespan	95%置信区间		平均寿命 Mean lifespan	观测细根数 Number observed	删失细根数 Number censored
树种 Tree species	中值寿命 Median lifespan	LCL	UCL	平均寿命 Mean lifespan	观测细根数 Number observed	删失细根数 Number censored
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	426 ± 103 ^d	242	426	417 ± 21 ^d	31	17
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	155 ± 35 ^c	153	175	216 ± 4 ^bc	1 745	488
竹柏 Nageia nagi	145 ± 20 ^bc	128	154	178 ± 7 ^b	436	102
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	126 ± 11 ^ab	105	188	179 ± 12 ^b	128	54
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	93 ± 7 ^a	93	96	126 ± 3 ^a	772	155
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	92 ± 63 ^ab	92	120	180 ± 9 ^b	444	192

树种 Tree species	根级 Root order	直径 Diam (mm)	比根长 SRL (m·g^-1)	根组织密度 RTD (g·cm^-3)	比根表面积 SRA (cm²·g^-1)
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	1	0.57 ± 0.03 ^Aa	19.06 ± 0.81 ^Aa	0.21 ± 0.02 ^Aa	340.61 ± 27.04 ^Aa
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	2	1.14 ± 0.06 ^Ab	3.43 ± 0.10 ^Ab	0.29 ± 0.03 ^Aab	123.26 ± 9.52 ^Ab
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	1	0.33 ± 0.00 ^Aa	26.62 ± 5.94 ^Aa	0.47 ± 0.11 ^Ba	275.29 ± 61.28 ^Aa
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	2	0.61 ± 0.03 ^Ab	7.18 ± 0.11 ^Ab	0.49 ± 0.05 ^Bab	137.74 ± 9.50 ^Ab
竹柏 Nageia nagi	1	0.45 ± 0.00 ^Aa	23.15 ± 0.27 ^Aa	0.27 ± 0.00 ^ABa	328.68 ± 3.77 ^Aa
竹柏 Nageia nagi	2	0.66 ± 0.02 ^Ab	7.27 ± 0.49 ^Ab	0.41 ± 0.04 ^ABab	151.14 ± 11.97 ^Ab
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	1	0.40 ± 0.01 ^Aa	25.61 ± 0.25 ^Aa	0.31 ± 0.01 ^ABa	323.48 ± 7.77 ^Aa
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	2	0.63 ± 0.05 ^Ab	8.92 ± 1.08 ^Ab	0.40 ± 0.09 ^ABab	178.26 ± 35.13 ^Ab
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	1	0.28 ± 0.01 ^Aa	35.41 ± 1.39 ^Aa	0.45 ± 0.04 ^Ba	317.36 ± 19.73 ^Aa
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	2	0.71 ± 0.05 ^Ab	4.92 ± 0.10 ^Ab	0.52 ± 0.07 ^Bab	110.46 ± 9.41 ^Ab
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	1	0.45 ± 0.00 ^Aa	28.26 ± 0.64 ^Aa	0.23 ± 0.00 ^Aa	397.19 ± 8.56 ^Aa
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	2	0.70 ± 0.05 ^Ab	9.26 ± 0.16 ^Ab	0.27 ± 0.05 ^Aab	205.60 ± 18.67 ^Ab

树种 Tree species	根级 Root order	直径 Diam (mm)	比根长 SRL (m·g^-1)	根组织密度 RTD (g·cm^-3)	比根表面积 SRA (cm²·g^-1)
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	1	0.57 ± 0.03 ^Aa	19.06 ± 0.81 ^Aa	0.21 ± 0.02 ^Aa	340.61 ± 27.04 ^Aa
红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana	2	1.14 ± 0.06 ^Ab	3.43 ± 0.10 ^Ab	0.29 ± 0.03 ^Aab	123.26 ± 9.52 ^Ab
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	1	0.33 ± 0.00 ^Aa	26.62 ± 5.94 ^Aa	0.47 ± 0.11 ^Ba	275.29 ± 61.28 ^Aa
复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata	2	0.61 ± 0.03 ^Ab	7.18 ± 0.11 ^Ab	0.49 ± 0.05 ^Bab	137.74 ± 9.50 ^Ab
竹柏 Nageia nagi	1	0.45 ± 0.00 ^Aa	23.15 ± 0.27 ^Aa	0.27 ± 0.00 ^ABa	328.68 ± 3.77 ^Aa
竹柏 Nageia nagi	2	0.66 ± 0.02 ^Ab	7.27 ± 0.49 ^Ab	0.41 ± 0.04 ^ABab	151.14 ± 11.97 ^Ab
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	1	0.40 ± 0.01 ^Aa	25.61 ± 0.25 ^Aa	0.31 ± 0.01 ^ABa	323.48 ± 7.77 ^Aa
樟 Cinnamomum camphora	2	0.63 ± 0.05 ^Ab	8.92 ± 1.08 ^Ab	0.40 ± 0.09 ^ABab	178.26 ± 35.13 ^Ab
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	1	0.28 ± 0.01 ^Aa	35.41 ± 1.39 ^Aa	0.45 ± 0.04 ^Ba	317.36 ± 19.73 ^Aa
东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis	2	0.71 ± 0.05 ^Ab	4.92 ± 0.10 ^Ab	0.52 ± 0.07 ^Bab	110.46 ± 9.41 ^Ab
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	1	0.45 ± 0.00 ^Aa	28.26 ± 0.64 ^Aa	0.23 ± 0.00 ^Aa	397.19 ± 8.56 ^Aa
深山含笑 Michelia maudiae	2	0.70 ± 0.05 ^Ab	9.26 ± 0.16 ^Ab	0.27 ± 0.05 ^Aab	205.60 ± 18.67 ^Ab

影响因素 Effect factor		红豆杉 Taxus wallichiana		复羽叶栾树 Koelreuteria bipinnata		竹柏 Nageia nagi		樟 Cinnamomum camphora		东京樱花 Cerasus yedoensis		深山含笑 Michelia maudiae
影响因素 Effect factor		p	Exp(B)	p	Exp(B)	p	Exp(B)	p	Exp(B)	p	Exp(B)	p	Exp(B)
出生季节 Birth season	春季 Spring	0.157	0.378	0.001	0.639	0.792	1.055	0.013	0.046	0.152	0.478	0.642	0.823
	夏季 Summer	0.000		0.000	0.425	0.426	0.826	0.931	0.916	0.102	0.449	0.037	0.410
	秋季 Autumn	0.825	0.644	0.620	0.930	0.021	1.640	0.397	0.414	0.379	0.598	0.384	0.671
	冬季 Winter			0.000		0.002		0.000		0.355		0.000
根级 Root order		0.413	0.624	0.073	1.252	0.000	0.291	0.000	9.059	0.135	1.828	0.000	3.355
出生年份 Birth year		0.017	0.029	0.083	0.860	0.001	1.917	0.614	1.188	0.755	0.921	0.922	0.986