8 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Why are nitrogenâfixing trees rare at higher compared to lower latitudes?
Symbiotic nitrogen (N) fixation provides a dominant source of new N to the terrestrial biosphere, yet in many cases the abundance of Nâfixing trees appears paradoxical. Nâfixing trees, which should be favored when N is limiting, are rare in higher latitude forests where N limitation is common, but are abundant in many lower latitude forests where N limitation is rare. Here, we develop a graphical and mathematical model to resolve the paradox. We use the model to demonstrate that N fixation is not necessarily cost effective under all degrees of N limitation, as intuition suggests. Rather, N fixation is only cost effective when N limitation is sufficiently severe. This general finding, specific versions of which have also emerged from other models, would explain sustained moderate N limitation because Nâfixing trees would either turn N fixation off or be outcompeted under moderate N limitation. From this finding, four general hypothesis classes emerge to resolve the apparent paradox of N limitation and Nâfixing tree abundance across latitude. The first hypothesis is that N limitation is less common at higher latitudes. This hypothesis contradicts prevailing evidence, so is unlikely, but the following three hypotheses all seem likely. The second hypothesis, which is new, is that even if N limitation is more common at higher latitudes, more severe N limitation might be more common at lower latitudes because of the capacity for higher N demand. Third, N fixation might be cost effective under milder N limitation at lower latitudes but only under more severe N limitation at higher latitudes. This third hypothesis class generalizes previous hypotheses and suggests new specific hypotheses. For example, greater tradeâoffs between N fixation and N use efficiency, soil N uptake, or plant turnover at higher compared to lower latitudes would make N fixation cost effective only under more severe N limitation at higher latitudes. Fourth, Nâfixing trees might adjust N fixation more at lower than at higher latitudes. This framework provides new hypotheses to explain the latitudinal abundance distribution of Nâfixing trees, and also provides a new way to visualize them. Therefore, it can help explain the seemingly paradoxical persistence of N limitation in many higher latitude forests
Nitrogen-fixing tree abundance in higher-latitude North America is not constrained by diversity
The rarity of nitrogen (N)-fixing trees in frequently N-limited higher-latitude (here, > 35°) forests is a central biogeochemical paradox. One hypothesis for their rarity is that evolutionary constraints limit N-fixing tree diversity, preventing N-fixing species from filling available niches in higher-latitude forests. Here, we test this hypothesis using data from the USA and Mexico. N-fixing trees comprise only a slightly smaller fraction of taxa at higher vs. lower latitudes (8% vs. 11% of genera), despite 11-fold lower abundance (1.2% vs. 12.7% of basal area). Furthermore, N-fixing trees are abundant but belong to few species on tropical islands, suggesting that low absolute diversity does not limit their abundance. Rhizobial taxa dominate N-fixing tree richness at lower latitudes, whereas actinorhizal species do at higher latitudes. Our results suggest that low diversity does not explain N-fixing trees' rarity in higher-latitude forests. Therefore, N limitation in higher-latitude forests likely results from ecological constraints on N fixation
Nitrogen-fixing tree abundance in higher-latitude North America is not constrained by diversity
The rarity of nitrogen (N)-fixing trees in frequently N-limited higher-latitude (here, > 35°) forests is a central biogeochemical paradox. One hypothesis for their rarity is that evolutionary constraints limit N-fixing tree diversity, preventing N-fixing species from filling available niches in higher-latitude forests. Here, we test this hypothesis using data from the USA and Mexico. N-fixing trees comprise only a slightly smaller fraction of taxa at higher vs. lower latitudes (8% vs. 11% of genera), despite 11-fold lower abundance (1.2% vs. 12.7% of basal area). Furthermore, N-fixing trees are abundant but belong to few species on tropical islands, suggesting that low absolute diversity does not limit their abundance. Rhizobial taxa dominate N-fixing tree richness at lower latitudes, whereas actinorhizal species do at higher latitudes. Our results suggest that low diversity does not explain N-fixing trees' rarity in higher-latitude forests. Therefore, N limitation in higher-latitude forests likely results from ecological constraints on N fixation