바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • KOREAN
  • P-ISSN2287-8327
  • E-ISSN2288-1220
  • SCOPUS, KCI

ISSN : 2287-8327

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.43 No.4

Citation Share

Nutrient dynamics in decomposing litter from four selected tree species in Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria

Journal of Ecology and Environment / Journal of Ecology and Environment, (P)2287-8327; (E)2288-1220
2019, v.43 no.4, pp.376-384
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-019-0139-y
Thomas Okoh (Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi)
Esther Edu (University of calabar)
Thomas, O. , & Esther, E. (2019). Nutrient dynamics in decomposing litter from four selected tree species in Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria. Journal of Ecology and Environment, 43(4), 376-384, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-019-0139-y

Abstract

Background: Nutrient release during litter decomposition was investigated in Vitex doniana, Terminalia avecinioides, Sarcocephallus latifolius, and Parinari curatellifolius in Makurdi, Benue State Nigeria (January 10 to March 10 and from June 10 to August 10, 2016). Leaf decomposition was measured as loss in mass of litter over time using the decay model Wt/W0 = e−kd t, while Kd ¼ −1t InðWt W0Þ was used to evaluate decomposition rate. Time taken for half of litter to decompose was measured using T50 = ln 2/k; while nutrient accumulation index was evaluated as NAI = ðωt Xt ωoXoÞ: Results: Average mass of litter remaining after exposure ranged from 96.15 g, (V. doniana) to 78.11 g, (S.lafolius) in dry (November to March) and wet (April to October) seasons. Decomposition rate was averagely faster in the wet season (0.0030) than in the dry season (0.0022) with P. curatellifolius (0.0028) and T.avecinioides (0.0039) having the fastest decomposition rates in dry and wet seasons. Mean residence time (days) ranged from 929 to 356, while the time (days) for half the original mass to decompose ranged from 622 to 201 (dry and wet seasons). ANOVA revealed highly significant differences (p < 0.01) in decomposition rates and exposure time (days) and a significant interaction (p < 0.05) between species and exposure time in both seasons. Conclusion: Slow decomposition in the plant leaves implied carbon retention in the ecosystem and slow release of CO2 back to the atmosphere, while nitrogen was mineralized in both seasons. The plants therefore showed effectiveness in nutrient cycling and support productivity in the ecosystem.

keywords
Nutrient dynamics, Litter decomposition, Decay coefficient, Nutrient accumulation index, Turnover rate

Reference

1.

Abugre SC, Oti-Boateng, Yeboah MF. Litterfall and decomposition trend of Jatropha curcas L. leaves mulches under two environmental conditions. Agric Biol J North Am. 2011;2(3):462–70.

2.

Aerts R. Climate, leaf litter chemistry and leaf litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: a triangular relationship. Oikos. 1997;79:439–49.

3.

Aldair EC, Hobbie SE, Hobbie RK. Single pool exponential decomposition models; potential pit falls in their use in ecological studies. Ecology. 2010;91:1225–36.

4.

Aponte C, Garcia LV, Maranon T. Tree species effect on Litter decomposition and nutrient release in Mediterranean Oak forests changes over time. Ecosystems. 2012;15:1204–18.

5.

Aponte C, Garcia LV, Perez-Ramos IM, Gutierrez E, Maranon T. Oak trees and soil interactions in Mediterranean forests: a positive feed-back model. J Vegetation Sci. 2011;22:856–67.

6.

Arriaga L, Maya Y. Spatial variability in decomposition rates in a desert scrub of North-western Mexico. Plant Ecol. 2007;189:213–25.

7.

Augusto L, Ranger J, Binkley D, Roth A. Impact of several common tree species of European temperate forests on soil fertility. Ann Sci. 2002;55(59):233–53.

8.

Austin AT, Vivanco L. Plant litter decomposition in a semi-arid ecosystem controlled by photo-degradation. Nature. 2006;442:555–8.

9.

Ayres E, Steltzer H, Berg S, Wall DH. Soil biota accelerates decomposition in highelevation forests by specializing in the breakdown of litter produced by the plant species above them. J Ecol. 2009;97:901–12.

10.

Cornelissen JHC, Van Bodegom PM, Aerts R, Callaghan TV, Van Logtestijin RSP, Alatalo J. Global negative feed-back to climate warning responses of litter decomposition rates in cold biomes. Ecol Lett. 2007;10:619–27.

11.

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). Food and fruit bearing forest species. 1: Examples from Eastern Africa. Rome: FAO Forestry Paper.44/1; 1983.

12.

Gautam MK, Lee KS, Song BY, Lee D, Bong YS. Early-stage changes in natural 13C and 15 N abundance and nutrient dynamics during different litter decomposition. J Plant Res. 2016;129:463–76.

13.

Gholz HL, Wedin DA, Smitherman SM. Long-term dynamics of pine and hardwood litter in contrasting environments: toward a global model of decomposition. Glob Chan Biol. 2000;6:750–65.

14.

Girisha JK, Condon LM, Clinton PW, Davis MR. Decomposition and nutrient dynamics of green and freshly fallen radiate pine (Pinus radiate) needles. Forest Ecol Manag. 2003;179:169–81.

15.

Gusewell S, Gessner MO. N:P ratios influence litter decomposition and colonization by fungi and bacteria in microsoms. Funct Ecol. 2009;23:211–9.

16.

Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Lienkaemper, G. W. Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. In Advances in ecological research; 1986. 15, p 133–302). Academic Press.

17.

Isaac SR, Nair MA. Biodegradation of leaf litters in the warm humid tropic of Kerala, India. Soil Biol Biochem. 2005;37:1656–64.

18.

Karberg NJ, Neal AS, Giadina PC. Methods for estimating litter decomposition. In: Hoover CM, editor. Field Measurements for Forest Carbon Monitoring. New York: Springer Science +Business Media B.V; 2008. p. 103–11.

19.

Kogbe CA. A brief history of geological society of Africa. Terra Nova. 1989;1(5): 399–401.

20.

Mitchell RJ, Campbell CD, Osler GHR, Van Bergen AJ, Ross LC, Cameron CM, Cole L. The cascading effects birch on heather moorland: a test for the top-down control of an ecosystem engineer. J Ecol. 2007;93:540–54.

21.

Negrete-Yankelevich S, Fragoso C, Newton A, Russell G, Heal O. Species specific characteristics of trees can determine the litter macro-invertebrate community and decomposition process below their canopies. Plant Soil. 2008;307:83–97.

22.

NIMET (Nigerian Meteorological Agency). Annual weather bulletin of the Nigerian Meteorological Agency. Makurdi: Tactical Air Command, Nigerian Air Force; 2015.

23.

NIMET (Nigerian Meteorological Agency). Annual weather bulletin of the Nigerian Meteorological Agency. Makurdi: Tactical Air Command, Nigerian Air Force; 2016.

24.

O’Neill EG, Johnson DW, Ledford J. Acute seasonal drought does not permanently alter mass loss and nitrogen dynamics during decomposition of red maple litter. Global Change Biol. 2003;9:117–23.

25.

Olson JS. Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology. 2007;44:322–31.

26.

Orwa C, Mutua A, Kindt R, Jamadass R, Anthony S. Agro-forestry database: a tree reference and selection guide version 4.0. Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre; 2009.

27.

Prescott CE, Zabek LM, Stanley CL. Decomposition of broadleaf and needle litter in forests of British Columbia: influences of litter type, forest type, and litter mixtures. Can J Forest Resourc. 2000;30:1742–50.

28.

Robertson GP, Paul EA. Decomposition and soil organic matter dynamic. In: Sale QE, Jackson RB, editors. Methods of Ecosystem Science. New York: Springer; 1999. p. 104–16.

29.

Tyowua BT, Agbelusi EA, Dera BA. Evaluation of vegetation types and utilization in wild life park of the University of Agriculture, Markurdi, Nigeria. Greener Journal of Agricultural Science, 2013;3(1), 001–005.

30.

Vivanco L, Austin AT. Tree species identity alters forest litter decomposition through long-term plant and soil interactions in Patagonia, Argentina. J Ecol. 2008;96:727–36.

31.

Xu S, Liu Y, Pei Z. Litter decomposition in a subtropical plantation in Qianyanzhou, China. J Res. 2011;16:8–15.

Journal of Ecology and Environment

e-Submission OA Policy