Abstract
Background and aims
Soil extracellular enzyme activities (EEAs) and extracellular enzymatic stoichiometry (EES) play an important role in soil nutrient cycling processes. However, the response of EEAs and EES to forest management practices remains unclear, which hinders our understanding of the mechanisms regulating nutrient cycling.
Methods
Soil microclimate, nutrients, microbial biomass, EEAs, and EES in Pinus massoniana plantations were investigated over 6 years after thinning (two levels: removal of 15% and 70% basal area) or understorey removal.
Results
(1) Compared to the controls, the activities of β-1.4-glucosidase (BG), β-1.4-N-acetylglucosaminidase (NAG), leucine aminopeptidase (LAP) and acid phosphatase (AP) were not significantly influenced by thinning or understorey removal during the first 3 years after treatment, in the 4th year, however, understorey removal significantly reduced AP, and heavily thinning significantly increased NAG. (2) Between year 4 and year 6 after treatment, thinning significantly decreased the ratio of ln(BG) to ln(NAG + LAP) but increased the ratio of ln(NAG + LAP) to ln(AP). (3) EEAs and EES were significantly regulated by soil temperature and dissolved carbon during the first 3 years after treatment, after which microorganisms and soil total nitrogen drove the EEAs and EES.
Conclusions
We found that thinning and understorey removal have similar effects on EEAs and EES. Our study suggests that nitrogen demand of soil microorganisms may change during the recovery of forests after thinning and understorey removal, which will further negatively affect EEAs and thus soil biogeochemical cycling.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Thinning and understorey removal are common forest management practices used worldwide to improve tree growth. However, the effects of thinning and understory removal on soil extracellular enzyme activities (EEAs) and extracellular enzymatic stoichiometry (EES) remain uncertain (Kim et al. 2016; Lull et al. 2020; Qiu et al. 2021). For instance, EEAs have been found to increase (Qiu et al. 2021), decrease (Geng et al. 2012), or remain unchanged (Kim et al. 2018) following forest thinning. EEAs can regulate nutrient cycling by affecting plant root growth and nutrient uptake (Ni et al. 2021), and by influencing decomposition and mineralization of soil organic matter (Saiya-Cork et al. 2002; Sinsabaugh et al. 2009; Sinsabaugh and Follstad Shah 2012), which will greatly affect forest growth, productivity, services, and carbon sequestration (Kim et al. 2016; Yang et al. 2018; Cheng et al. 2021; Qiu et al. 2021).
Soil extracellular enzymes produced by microorganisms and plants are ubiquitous in soil environment (Sinsabaugh et al. 2009; Allison et al. 2010). The production of soil extracellular enzymes is mainly influenced by vegetation composition (Yang et al. 2018; He et al. 2020), quality and quantity of litter input (Allison and Vitousek 2005), microclimate (Peng and Wang 2016), soil nutrient status (Sinsabaugh et al. 2009; Allison et al. 2010), and microbial communities (Yang et al. 2021). The short-term effects of thinning or understorey removal on EEAs may be caused by abrupt changes in vegetation composition, increased residue inputs, and changes in soil microclimate such as soil temperature (Cheng et al. 2021) and soil water content (Peng and Wang 2016). Higher soil temperature and higher soil moisture can improve EEAs by promoting microbial activities (Zhou et al. 2020). However, higher soil temperature may accelerate water stress by increasing evaporation and reducing substrate availability, thereby inhibiting hydrolase activity (Peng and Wang 2016). In the long term, increased growth rates of the remaining trees (Lei et al. 2021) may alter the availability of soil resources and thus affect EEAs. The EEAs was reported to vary with the growth rate of the remaining trees and the time observed after thinning (Zhou et al. 2020). For example, acid phosphatase (AP) (Kim et al. 2016; Lull et al. 2020), β-1.4-glucosidase (BG) (Kim et al. 2016) and β-1.4-N-acetylglucosaminidase (NAG) (Geng et al. 2012) were not significantly affected by thinning during the first 4 years after thinning (Qiu et al. 2021), while all three enzymes were found to be significantly influenced by thinning in the 9th year post-treatment (Qiu et al. 2021). Therefore, continuous long-term observations are important to better understand the changes in EEAs after forest management.
As mentioned above, microorganisms may alter enzyme production in response to changes in resource availability (Allison and Vitousek 2005; Allison et al. 2010) after thinning and/or understorey removal. The change of enzyme production reflected the resource allocation theory (Allison and Vitousek 2005; Sinsabaugh and Follstad Shah 2012), that is, microbes produce more extracellular enzymes to mine the limited amounts of elements from environment (e.g., soils). Extracellular enzyme stoichiometry (EES) has thus reflected the biogeochemical equilibrium between the nutrient requirement of microbial assemblages and the nutrient availability of environment (Sinsabaugh et al. 2008, 2009) and been used to identify nutrient deficiencies and microbial nutrient requirements (Sinsabaugh and Follstad Shah 2012; Waring et al. 2014; Yang et al. 2021). A global meta-analysis by Zhou et al. (2020) showed that the resource use strategies of microorganisms differed with the stage of recovery associated with changes in tree growth rate and resource availability following forest thinning. For example, understorey removal and thinning can reduce competition for soil resources for a short period of time due to reduced plant density, but accelerated tree growth as the forest recovers (Lei et al. 2021; Cheng et al. 2021) may increase nutrient demand, which may then lead to nutrient limitation for microorganisms (Qiu et al. 2021). However, studies on long term response of EES to thinning and understorey removal are rare. The effect of thinning or understory removal on EES can be both negative and positive, especially in forest ecosystems with certain limited soil nutrient (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) that constrained the tree growth (LeBauer and Treseder 2008; Augusto et al. 2017; Jian et al. 2021). On one hand, substrate input caused by treatment may provide more nutrient for microbes and relieve nutrient limitation, but accelerated tree growth with low input of litter may cause greater nutrient limitation for microbes (Qiu et al. 2021).
Pinus massoniana Lamb. is a dominant tree species with low soil phosphorus in subtropical China (Jian et al. 2021), and it covers an area of 8.04 million ha and plays an important role in C sequestration, soil and water conservation (National Forestry and Grassland Administration 2019). Thinning or understorey removal practices have been commonly used in P. massoniana plantations to improve forest productivity. In this study, we investigated the response of soil EEAs and EES to understorey removal and to two levels of thinning in P. massoniana plantations over a 6-year period. We hypothesize that (1) soil EEAs and EES respond to thinning or understorey removal similarly, because both thinning and understorey removal have similar effects on soil microclimate and nutrients, (2) the response of soil EEAs and EES to thinning or understorey removal varies with the time of stand recovery from the treatments, and (3) soil nutrients rather than soil microclimate (i.e. soil temperature and water content) altered by thinning and understorey removal determine the responses of EEAs and EES during the recovery period.
Materials and methods
Study area and thinning experiments
The study plantations are in Jiulingtou Forest Farm (30°59′N, 110°47′E), Zigui County, Hubei Province. The soil type belongs to Haplic Luvisol soil (according to Chinese soil classification) with a depth of 100–120 cm. The annual rainfall in this area is approximately 1000–1250 mm, which mainly occurred between April and September. And the annual mean temperature is 12.6 °C, ranging from − 8.7 °C to 32.1 °C (Lei et al. 2021).
Three large seeded P. massoniana plantations established in the 1970s were chosen as the object (n = 3 plantations). In each plantation, four plots (20 × 20 m each) with at least 20 m distance between any two plots were established (Lei et al. 2018). The tree density of the plantations was approximately 1700 stems per ha, and the canopy coverage was about 80% before this experiment. P. massoniana accounted for more than 90% of the total stem. Other coexisting tree species included Toxicodendron vernicifluum, Betula luminifera and Cunninghamia lanceolata. The understorey species were mainly Pyracantha fortuneana, Litsea pungens, and Lespedeza bicolour, and the coverage of the understorey vegetation is ~ 49%.
In September 2013, 4 treatments were randomly conducted in four plots (one treatment for one plot) in each plantation, and all 4 treatment were repeated three times (n = 3 plantations): (1) control (intact plots); (2) understorey removal (the aboveground parts of understorey shrubs were cut back and removed from the plots in September 2013, and repeated annually during the experimental period to keep the plots free of understorey shrubs); (3) light thinning, which reduces the stand basal area by ~ 15%, and (4) heavily thinning, which reduces the stand basal area by ~ 70%. Thinning treatment did not remove the understorey vegetation, and all residuals were removed from the plots (Lei et al. 2018, 2021). In the 3rd year (2016) after treatment, the annual diameter increment at breast height of the remaining trees was significantly higher in understorey removal plots (1.10 ± 0.07 cm), light thinned (1.12 ± 0.06 cm) and heavily thinned plots (1.04 ± 0.12 cm) than in control plots (0.96 ± 0.09 cm) (Lei et al. 2021).
Soil sampling
In summer (June or July) of 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2019 (5 sampling years), i.e., in the 1st (2014), 2nd (2015), 3rd (2016), 4th (2017) and 6th (2019) years after treatment, nine randomized soil samples (0–10 cm depth) were collected using an auge in each plot after removing the upper organic layer. And then all nine soil samples taken in each plot were fully mixed and stored in a refrigerator at 4 ℃. The sampling locations were marked to avoid repeated sampling at the same location, and 60 samples were analysed.
The soil temperature at a soil depth of 10 cm in each plot was measured hourly using a EM50 Data logger with five sensors (Decagon Devices, WA, USA). The mean soil temperature in each sampling month was calculated for further analysis.
Measurement of soil properties
Each mixed soil sample was divided into two parts for the measurement of soil properties. One part was air-dried and passed through a 2 mm mesh sieve for pH analysis and through a 0.149 mm mesh sieve for soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) analysis. The remaining part was passed through a 2 mm mesh sieve and divided into two subsamples: one subsample was stored at 4 ℃ for measurement of soil water contents and soil extracellular enzyme activities (EEAs), and the other subsample was stored at –20 ℃ for soil microbial biomass carbon/nitrogen (MBC/MBN) and dissolved organic carbon/nitrogen analysis. All analyses were completed within 1 month.
The soil water content was measured using oven-dried method within 1 day after sampling. Soil pH was analysed in a 1:2.5 soil-water suspension (Huang et al. 2014). Dichromate oxidation method was used to quantify soil organic carbon (Nelson and Sommers 1996), and the Kjeldahl method was used to analyse soil total nitrogen, which is the sum of the organic bounded nitrogen group and the ammonium-nitrogen (Bremmer 1996). Dissolved organic carbon and dissolved organic nitrogen were determined by K2SO4 extraction (Jones and Willett 2006): soil-to-solution ratio of 1:5 (w/v) was extracted with 0.5 M K2SO4 shaking during 1 h at 20 ℃, and the dissolved organic carbon and dissolved organic nitrogen in the extracts were detected with an elemental analyzer (elementar vario Macro cube, Germany). Chloroform fumigation extraction was used to determine MBC and MBN (Brookes et al. 1985; Vance et al. 1987). The Bcn/Dcn ratio (Bcn is the ratio between MBC and MBN, Dcn is the ratio between dissolved organic carbon and dissolved organic nitrogen) was also calculated (Cui et al. 2018).
Enzyme assay
Β-1.4-glucosidase (BG, a C-acquiring enzyme), β-1.4-N-acetylglucosaminidase (NAG, an N-acquiring enzyme), leucine aminopeptidase (LAP, also an N-acquiring enzyme) and acid phosphatase (AP, an organic P-acquiring enzyme) were measured using fluorometric protocol within a week after sampling (Saiya-Cork et al. 2002; German et al. 2011). And 4-methylumbelliferyl substrates were used for measurement of BG, NAG and AP, and L-leucine-7-amido-4-methyl substrates were used for measurement of LAP. First, soil slurries were prepared by homogenizing fresh soils (equal to 1 g dry soil) in 125 ml 50 mM acetate buffer (pH = 5.5) for one minute. Then, 96-well microplates were used (8 replicate wells per sample per assay). The analysis of each sample included eight replicate wells for each enzyme (200 μl soil slurries + 50 μl substrate), a blank (200 μl soil slurries + 50 μl buffer), a negative control (200 μl buffer + 50 μl substrates), and a quench standard (200 μl soil slurries + 50 μl standard substrate). After incubated in the dark at 25 °C for 3 h, a 10 μl aliquot of 1 mol·L−1 NaOH was added to each well of microplates to stop the reaction. At last, fluorescence was measured using a fluorometer (SpectraMax i3x, Molecular Devices, Beckman Kurt, America) with 365-nm excitation and 450-nm emission filters (Jian et al. 2021). EEAs were normalized in units of nmol·h−1·g−1 dry soil (German et al. 2011). Soil extracellular enzyme stoichiometry (EES) was determined using ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP), ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) and ln(BG):ln(AP), respectively (Sinsabaugh and Follstad Shah 2012).
Statistical analysis
The effects of treatment, recovery time (sampling year) after treatment and their interactions on EEAs, EES and other variables were evaluated by Linear mixed models. After normality testing and Mauchly’s test, treatment and year were used as fixed factors in each year, and interannual variations (year-to-year) of EEAs, EES and other variables in relation to treatment were analysed. In all these analyses, plantation (i.e., site) was considered as a random factor (Fig. 1). Differences among the levels of factors were determined by post hoc multiple comparisons. Linear mixed models and post hoc multiple comparisons were performed using “nlme” and “multcomp” R packages.
Redundancy analysis (RDA) was used to analyse the relationships between EEAs or EES and other variables. The “ordiR2step” function of the “vegan” R package was used to conduct a forward-selection procedure on soil properties to determine which soil property significantly dominated the variations in EEAs and EES (P < 0.05). Statistical analyses and graphics were processed using R software (version 4.1.2, R Core Team 2021), and α < 0.05 level was used to determine the statistical significance.
Result
Changes in soil properties
Treatment (i.e., thinning or understorey removal) significantly affected soil temperature, soil water content, pH, dissolved organic carbon, microbial biomass carbon (MBC), and the Bcn/Dcn ratio (Fig. 1): Compared to the control, heavily thinning significantly increased soil temperature, light thinning significantly decreased soil water content, and understorey removal significantly decreased dissolved organic carbon. Both thinning and understorey removal significantly decreased MBC, and only thinning but not understorey removal significantly decreased the Bcn/Dcn ratio. Soil temperature, soil water content, pH, dissolved organic carbon, MBC, microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN) and Bcn/Dcn were all significantly affected by sampling time (year) (Fig. 1).
Treatment x time interactions significantly affected soil organic carbon (SOC), total nitrogen (TN), and dissolved organic nitrogen (Fig. 1). Compared to the control, thinning significantly decreased SOC, TN, and dissolved organic nitrogen (Fig. 1D, E and G) in the 3rd year, and understorey removal significantly decreased dissolved organic nitrogen in the 4th year.
Changes in soil EEAs and EES
Time alone significantly affected BG and LAP (Fig. 2A and C). The effects of treatments (i.e. thinning, understorey removal) on AP and NAG varied across years, showing a significant treatment x time interaction (Fig. 2B and D). Compared to the control, a significant effect of treatments was found in the 4th year: understorey removal significantly decreased AP (Fig. 2B), while heavily thinning significantly increased NAG (Fig. 2D).
Both treatments and time showed significant effects on both the ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio and the ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio (Fig. 3A and C). Compared to the control, heavily thinning increased the ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio but decreased the ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio. A higher ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio and a lower ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio were found in the 2nd and the 3rd year. Both thinning and understorey removal significantly decreased the ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio but increased the ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio in the 4th and 6th year (Fig. S1). The ln(BG):ln(AP) ratio was only significantly influenced by recovery time (Fig. 3B).
Relationships between the EEAs and EES of soil and soil properties
Redundancy analysis showed that soil properties can only explain 10.93% of the variation in EEAs and EES. When we divided the 6 observation years into two recovery stages based on the changes in EEAs, EES and Zhou et al. (2020), i.e., an early phase of 1–3 years and a middle phase of 4–6 years after treatment, we found that soil properties explained 53.92% of the variation in EEAs and EES in the early phase (Fig. 4A). Dissolved organic carbon was positively correlated with both EEAs and EES (except for ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio) and it could explain 21% of the variation in EEAs and EES. Soil temperature was another important factor, explaining 12% of the variation. Soil temperature was positively correlated with ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio, but negatively correlated with EEAs (except LAP) and other EES (Fig. 4A). Soil properties explained 72.56% of the variation in EEAs and EES in the middle recovery phase (Fig. 4B). Both MBC and MBN were positively correlated with BG, ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio, and ln(BG):ln(AP) ratio, while MBC was negatively correlated with NAG, LAP and ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio (Fig. 4B). MBN was also positively correlated with AP and NAG. TN showed a positive correlation with nitrogen-related enzymes and ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio (Fig. 4B).
Discussion
Effects of thinning or understorey removal on EEAs and EES over time
In line with our 1st hypothesis, we found significant lower soil microbial biomass (MBC) in the thinned or understorey-removed plots than in the controls. These may be the result of decreased litter input due to reduced plant density by thinning or understorey removal (Campbell et al. 2009) on the one hand, and increased soil temperature and decreased soil water content caused by treatment (Fig. 4) on the other hand (Peng and Wang 2016).
Changes in EES are often used to determine the nutrient requirements of microorganisms (Sinsabaugh et al. 2008; Waring et al. 2014; Yang et al. 2021). Soil organic matter and nutrient availabilities are closely correlated with EEAs (Sinsabaugh 2010), which has also been confirmed by significant effects of dissolved organic carbon and TN on soil enzyme activities in our study (Fig. 4). When the supply of nutrients is consistent with the demand of microbes, microbes tend to reduce the costs of enzyme production and inhibit enzyme activity; otherwise, enzyme production is accelerated (Allison and Vitousek 2005; Burns et al. 2013).
Again, consistent with our 1st hypothesis, we found that both thinning and understorey removal did not have significant effect on EEAs and EES during the first three years following treatment (Table S1). There might be sufficient nutrients for microbes, as similar dissolved organic carbon per unit of microbial biomass (expressed as a ratio between dissolved organic carbon and MBC) was found in all treatments. However, reduced litter input (Lei et al. 2021) and thus N content from litter (Table S2) in the 3rd year caused by heavily thinning, might lead to significantly increased NAG in the 4th year, which helps to degrade relatively complex compounds (i.e., roots residues) to obtain N (Burns et al. 2013; Sinsabaugh et al. 2009). Meanwhile, we also found that both thinning and understorey removal decreased AP in the 4th year (Fig. 2B), which may be due to a decrease in AP produced by the removed plants (Allison et al. 2010), as well as a decrease in N input in the 3rd year, since AP production requires sufficient N availability (Treseder and Vitousek 2001).
Similarly, we also found that both thinning and understorey removal decreased the ratio of ln(BG) to ln(NAG + LAP), and increased the ratio of ln(NAG + LAP) to ln(AP) in the 4th and 6th year after treatment (Fig. S1), which may be related to a decrease of needle litter TN, soil TN and soil dissolved organic nitrogen occurred in the 3rd year (Table S2, Fig. 1). According to resource allocation theory and the biogeochemical equilibrium model (\(Scn = \frac{Bcn}{Dcn}\times \frac{1}{ln(BG):ln(NAG+LAP)}\)) (Sinsabaugh and Follstad Shah 2012; Cui et al. 2018), microbes regulate their enzyme production to maintain a relatively stable N supply. A significantly lower Bcn/Dcn (Fig. 1J) ratio accompanied with significant positive relationship between ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio and Bcn/Dcn ratio (Fig. S2) indicated that microbes regulated ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio in response to decreased soil dissolved organic nitrogen occurred in the 3rd year (Cui et al. 2018).When nitrogen is lower, microbes produce phenol oxidase to mineralize poorly available C sources to obtain N (Schimel 2003; Manzoni et al. 2012). Consistently, we found higher phenol oxidase in thinning or understorey removal plots in this period (Fig. S3). Our results also suggest that microbes regulate nutrient utilization strategies by altering the production of EEAs to adapt to treatment-induced nutrient changes (i.e., N in our study).
We found strong effects of recovery time on EEAs and EES, which supports our hypothesis 2. Similarly, Zhou et al. (2020) found that the response of EEAs to thinning changed with recovery stages based on a global meta-analysis. The findings of Zhou et al. (2020) emphasized that the input of thinning residues, high soil temperature and soil water content stimulated the productions of EEAs during the first 3 years after treatment. In our study, the above ground residues were removed from the plots, and only root residues were left in the treated plots. More persistent root residues (Wu et al. 2018) combined with reduced litter inputs (Lei et al. 2021) reduced the substrate for both microbial growth and the production of EEAs. Therefore, EEAs tended to decrease with significantly decreased soil microbes during the first 3 years (Figs. 1H and 2). The reduced substrate might still meet the demand of surviving microbes, so there was no significant changes in EES (Kim et al. 2016).
Due to decreased labile substrate inputs (i.e., above ground litter) in the previous years, microbes adjusted their enzyme production to use recalcitrant substrate, as shown by increases in both phenol oxidase (Fig. S3) and NAG (Fig. 2D) in the heavily thinning plots with the minimum litter input in the 4th and 6th year (Schimel 2003; Manzoni et al. 2012; Burns et al. 2013). In addition to the effects of litter quantity and quality, the growth rate of the remaining trees might also regulate EEAs and EES through the utilization of soil nutrients. Earlier studies showed that thinning increased the uptake of all elements (Mitchell et al. 1996) and nitrogen uptake was highly correlated with tree growth (Carlyle 1998) after thinning, we also found significant negative correlation between increment of diameter at breast height and soil N (Fig. S4). Accelerated tree growth (Lei et al. 2021), decreased litter fall and litter N inputs (Fig. S4, Table S2) in thinning or understorey removal plots in the previous years led to decreased soil N and then caused both lower AP and ln(BG):ln(NAG + LAP) ratio but higher ln(NAG + LAP):ln(AP) ratio in the following years. Our results suggest that changes in key nutrients that regulate soil microbes may cause significant shifts in EEAs and EES. Considering the effect of EEAs and EES on mineralization process, it is speculated that N may be the key factor limit growth of trees in the following years.
Effects of soil environment on EEAs and EES
Soil variables explained only ~ 11% of the variations in EEAs and EES over the entire study period. However, soil variables explained more than 50% of the variation in EEAs and EES at different recovery stages after treatment, i.e., an early phase of 1–3 years and a middle phase of 4–6 years after treatment. Consistent with our hypothesis 3, soil microbes had the greatest effects on EEAs and EES, followed by soil nutrients, and soil microclimate (soil temperature) (Fig. 4). Significant effects of soil microbes and soil nutrients on EEAs and EES in forests have also been reported by Qiu et al. (2021).
Enzyme production requires large amounts of nutrients (Sinsabaugh et al. 2009), thus we found that soil nutrients rather than soil microclimate affected enzyme production, and that dissolved organic carbon was positively correlated with EEAs and MBC in early recovery phase after treatment (Fig. 4A). In the middle recovery phase, significant decreases in soil N availability in the 3rd year after treatment suggested a high N demand for microbes in thinning or understorey removal plots, thus soil N became an important nutrient regulating EEAs and EES (Fig. 4B). This high N demand for microbes is further enhanced by the N-investment into enzyme production (Schimel 2003), therefore we found that the relationship between soil microbes (MBC) and N-acquiring enzymes shifted from a positive correlation in the early recovery stage to a negative correlation in the middle recovery stage (Fig. 4). This result suggests that there is a trade-off between soil enzyme production and microbes to optimize the acquisition of soil N in response to availability of soil nutrients. Our findings are consistent with the resource allocation theory that the relationship between EEAs and available nutrients may change when the response of microorganisms to changes in available nutrients reaches a boundary (Sinsabaugh et al. 2002; Wallenius et al. 2011; Xu et al. 2017).
The significant effects of soil temperature on EEAs and EES were found only in the early recovery phase (Fig. 4A). Higher soil temperature may reduce substrate availability and decrease soil water availability due to increased evaporation, thereby inhibiting EEAs (Peng and Wang 2016), as indicated by the negative correlation between soil temperature and EEAs (except LAP) (Fig. 4A). Soil temperature may indirectly regulate LAP through its effect on soil water content, as LAP has been observed to be positively correlated with soil water content in our study and elsewhere (Liao et al. 2016).
Conclusions
In this study, we found that thinning or understorey removal had similar time-dependent effects on soil extracellular enzyme activity and soil extracellular enzymatic stoichiometry during post-treatment recovery of forests. This is mainly because, regardless of the magnitude of biomass reduction, thinning or understorey removal similarly reduce the aboveground biomass of the stand and undergo a similar process of stand recovery after treatment. Decreased ratio of ln(BG) to ln(NAG + LAP) and increased ratio of ln(NAG + LAP) to ln(AP) suggest that nitrogen demand of soil microorganisms may change during the recovery of forests after thinning or understorey removal, which will negatively affect EEAs and thus soil biogeochemical cycling, and ultimately influence forest growth rate and productivity. These implications suggest that the above ground residues should be left in stand, which would be beneficial to nutrient supply for both trees and microbes, and thus lighten the effect of thinning or understorey removal on soil nutrient and tree growth.
References
Allison SD, Vitousek PM (2005) Responses of extracellular enzymes to simple and complex nutrient inputs. Soil Biol Biochem 37(5):937–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.09.014
Allison SD, Weintraub MN, Gartner TB, Waldrop MP (2010) Evolutionary-economic principles as regulators of soil enzyme production and ecosystem function. Soil Enzymol 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14225-3_12
Arivin Rivaie A (2014) The effects of understory vegetation on P availability in Pinus radiata forest stands: A review. J For Res 25(3):489–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-014-0488-4
Augusto L, Achat DL, Jonard M, Vidal D, Ringeval B (2017) Soil parent material—A major driver of plant nutrient limitations in terrestrial ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 23(9):3808–3824. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13691
Bremmer JM (1996) Nitrogen-total. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 3 Chemical Methods 5:1085–1121. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3.c37
Brookes P, Landman A, Pruden G, Jenkinson D (1985) Chloroform fumigation and the release of soil nitrogen: a rapid direct extraction method to measure microbial biomass nitrogen in soil. Soil Bio Biochem 17(6):837–842. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(85)90144-0
Burns RG, DeForest JL, Marxsen J, Sinsabaugh RL, Stromberger ME, Wallenstein MD, Weintraub MN, Zoppini A (2013) Soil enzymes in a changing environment: Current knowledge and future directions. Soil Bio Biochem 58:216–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.11.009
Cheng X, Han H, Zhu J, Peng X, Li B, Liu H, Epstein HE (2021) Forest thinning and organic matter manipulation drives changes in soil respiration in a Larix principis-rupprechtii plantation in China. Soil Tillage Res 211:104996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2021.104996
Campbell J, Alberti G, Martin J, Law B (2009) Carbon dynamics of a ponderosa pine plantation following a thinning treatment in the northern Sierra Nevada. For Ecol Manage 257:453–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.021
Carlyle JC (1998) Relationships between nitrogen uptake, leaf area, water status and growth in an 11-year-old Pinus radiata plantation in response to thinning, thinning residue, and nitrogen fertilizer. For Ecol Manage 108:41–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00333-2
Cui Y, Fang L, Guo X, Wang X, Zhang Y, Li P, Zhang X (2018) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial nutrient limitation in rhizosphere soil in the arid area of the northern Loess Plateau, China. Soil Biol Biochem 116:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2017.09.025
Geng Y, Dighton J, Gray D (2012) The effects of thinning and soil disturbance on enzyme activities under pitch pine soil in New Jersey Pinelands. Appl Soil Ecol 62:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2012.07.001
German DP, Weintraub MN, Grandy AS, Lauber CL, Rinkes ZL, Allison SD (2011) Optimization of hydrolytic and oxidative enzyme methods for ecosystem studies. Soil Bio Biochem 43(7):1387–1397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.03.017
He Q, Wu Y, Bing H, Zhou J, Wang J (2020) Vegetation type rather than climate modulates the variation in soil enzyme activities and stoichiometry in subalpine forests in the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Geoderma 374:114424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114424
Hou E, Chen C, Luo Y, Zhou G, Kuang Y, Zhang Y, Heenan M, Lu X, Wen D (2018) Effects of climate on soil phosphorus cycle and availability in natural terrestrial ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 24(8):3344–3356. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14093
Huang X, Liu S, Wang H, Hu Z, Li Z, You Y (2014) Changes of soil microbial biomass carbon and community composition through mixing nitrogen-fixing species with Eucalyptus urophylla in subtropical China. Soil Biol Biochem 73:42–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.01.021
Jian Z, Ni Y, Zeng L, Lei L, Xu J, Xiao W, Li M-H (2021) Latitudinal patterns of soil extracellular enzyme activities and their controlling factors in Pinus massoniana plantations in subtropical China. For Ecol Manage 495:119358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119358
Jing X, Chen X, Fang J, Ji C, Shen H, Zheng C, Zhu B (2020) Soil microbial carbon and nutrient constraints are driven more by climate and soil physicochemical properties than by nutrient addition in forest ecosystems. Soil Biol Biochem 141:107657
Jones D, Willett V (2006) Experimental evaluation of methods to quantify dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 38(5):991–999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.08.012
Kim S, Han SH, Li G, Yoon TK, Lee S-T, Kim C, Son Y (2016) Effects of thinning intensity on nutrient concentration and enzyme activity in Larix kaempferi forest soils. J Ecol Environ 40(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-016-0007-y
Kim S, Li G, Han SH, Kim H-J, Kim C, Lee S-T, Son Y (2018) Thinning affects microbial biomass without changing enzyme activity in the soil of Pinus densiflora Sieb. et Zucc. forests after 7 years. Ann For Sci 75(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0690-1
Kuzyakov Y, Xu X (2013) Competition between roots and microorganisms for nitrogen: mechanisms and ecological relevance. New Phytol 198(3):656–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12235
Lebauer DS, Treseder KK (2008) Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed. Ecology 89:371–379
Lei L, Xiao W, Zeng L, Frey B, Huang Z, Zhu J, Cheng R, Li M-H (2021) Effects of thinning intensity and understory removal on soil microbial community in Pinus massoniana plantations of subtropical China. Appl Soil Ecol 167:104055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.104055
Lei L, Xiao W, Zeng L, Zhu J, Huang Z, Cheng R, Gao S, Li M-H (2018) Thinning but not understory removal increased heterotrophic respiration and total soil respiration in Pinus massoniana stands. Sci Total Environ 621:1360–1369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.092
Liao X, Inglett PW, Inglett KS (2016) Seasonal patterns of nitrogen cycling in subtropical short-hydroperiod wetlands: Effects of precipitation and restoration. Sci Total Environ 556:136–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.203
Lull C, Bautista I, Lidón A, del Campo AD, González-Sanchis M, García-Prats A (2020) Temporal effects of thinning on soil organic carbon pools, basal respiration and enzyme activities in a Mediterranean Holm oak forest. For Ecol Manage 464:118088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118088
Manzoni S, Taylor P, Richter A, Porporato A, Agren GI (2012) Environmental and stoichiometric controls on microbial carbon-use efficiency in soils. New Phytol 196(1):79–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04225.x
Mitchell AK, Barclay HJ, Brix H, Pollard DFW, Benton R, DeJong R (1996) Biomass and nutrient element dynamics in Douglas-fir: effects of thinning and nitrogen fertilization over 18 years. Can J for Res 26(3):376–388. https://doi.org/10.1139/x26-042
National Forestry and Grassland Administration (2019) Forest resources report for China (2014–2018). Chinses Forestry Press, Beijing
Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 3 Chemical Methods 5:961–1010. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3.c34
Ni H, Su W, Fan S, Chu H (2021) Effects of intensive management practices on rhizosphere soil properties, root growth, and nutrient uptake in Moso bamboo plantations in subtropical China. For Ecol Manage 493:119083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119083
Peng X, Wang W (2016) Stoichiometry of soil extracellular enzyme activity along a climatic transect in temperate grasslands of northern China. Soil Biol Biochem 98(1):74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.04.008
Qiu X, Peng D, Tian H, Wang H, Liu X, Cao L, Li Z, Chen S (2021) Soil ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial resource limitation driven by thinning practices and season types in Larix principis-rupprechtii plantations in North China. For Ecol Manage 482:118880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118880
R Core Team (2021) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
Saiya-Cork KR, Sinsabaugh RL, Zak DR (2002) The effects of long term nitrogen deposition on extracellular enzyme activity in an Acer saccharum forest soil. Soil Biol Biochem 34(9):1309–1315. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00074-3
Schimel J (2003) The implications of exoenzyme activity on microbial carbon and nitrogen limitation in soil: a theoretical model. Soil Biol Biochem 35(4):549–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00015-4
Sinsabaugh RL, Carreiro MM, Repert DA (2002) Allocation of extracellular enzymatic activity in relation to litter composition, N deposition, and mass loss. Biogeochemistry 60(1):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016541114786
Sinsabaugh RL (2010) Phenol oxidase, peroxidase and organic matter dynamics of soil. Soil Biol Biochem 42(3):391–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.10.014
Sinsabaugh RL, Follstad Shah JJ (2012) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and ecological theory. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 43(1):313–343. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-071112-124414
Sinsabaugh RL, Hill BH, Follstad Shah JJ (2009) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial organic nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment. Nature 462(7274):795–798. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08632
Sinsabaugh RL, Lauber CL, Weintraub MN, Ahmed B, Allison SD, Crenshaw C, Contosta AR, Cusack D, Frey S, Gallo ME, Gartner TB, Hobbie SE, Holland K, Keeler BL, Powers JS, Stursova M, Takacs-Vesbach C, Waldrop MP, Wallenstein MD, Zak DR, Zeglin LH (2008) Stoichiometry of soil enzyme activity at global scale. Ecol Lett 11(11):1252–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01245.x
Treseder KK, Vitousek PM (2001) Effects of soil nutrient availability on investment in acquisition of N and P in Hawaiian rain forests. Ecology 82(4):946–954. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0946:EOSNAO]2.0.CO;2
Vance ED, Brookes PC, Jenkinson DS (1987) An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol Biochem 19(6):703–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(87)90052-6
Wallenius K, Rita H, Mikkonen A, Lappi K, Lindstrom K, Hartikainen H, Raateland A, Niemi M (2011) Effects of land use on the level, variation and spatial structure of soil enzyme activities and bacterial communities. Soil Biol Biochem 43(7):1464–1473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.03.018
Waring BG, Weintraub SR, Sinsabaugh RL (2014) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial nutrient acquisition in tropical soils. Biogeochemistry 117(1):101–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-013-9849-x
Wu JJ, Zhang DD, Chen Q, Feng J, Li QX, Yang F, Zhang Q, Cheng XL (2018) Shifts in soil orga-nic carbon dynamics under detritus input manipulations in a coniferous forest ecosystem in subtropical China. Soil Biol Biochem 126:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.08.010
Xu Z, Yu G, Zhang X, He N, Wang Q, Wang S, Wang R, Zhao N, Jia Y, Wang C (2017) Soil enzyme activity and stoichiometry in forest ecosystems along the North-South Transect in eastern China (NSTEC). Soil Biol Biochem 104:152–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.10.020
Yang Y, Li T, Wang Y, Dou Y, Cheng H, Liu L, An S (2021) Linkage between soil ectoenzyme stoichiometry ratios and microbial diversity following the conversion of cropland into grassland. Agric Ecosyst Environ 314:107418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107418
Yang Y, Zhang X, Zhang C, Wang H, Fu X, Chen F, Wan S, Sun X, Wen X, Wang J (2018) Understory vegetation plays the key role in sustaining soil microbial biomass and extracellular enzyme activities. Biogeosciences 15(14):4481–4494. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-4481-2018
Zhou T, Wang C, Zhou Z (2020) Impacts of forest thinning on soil microbial community structure and extracellular enzyme activities: A global meta-analysis. Soil Biol Biochem 149:107915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107915
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (32192434, 32101501) and the National Nonprofit Institute Research Grant of the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAFYBB2016SY015). The authors thank all those who provided helpful suggestions and critical comments on this manuscript. We also thank the National Forest Ecosystem Station of Three Gorges Reservoir in Zigui County for their support in our field work.
Funding
This work was supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (32192434,32101501) and the National Nonprofit Institute Research Grant of the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAFYBB2016SY015).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Lixiong Zeng, Wenfa Xiao, Changfu Liu and Lei Lei designed this research and revised the manuscript critically; Lei Lei, Zunji Jian, and Yafei Shen conducted field work and laboratory analysis; Lixiong Zeng, Changfu Liu, Lei Lei and Mai-He Li carried out the data analysis and drafted the manuscript. All the authors commented on the analysis and gave final approval for publication.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Timothy J. Fahey.
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Zeng, L., Xiao, W., Liu, C. et al. Effects of thinning and understorey removal on soil extracellular enzyme activity vary over time during forest recovery after treatment. Plant Soil 492, 457–469 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-06187-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-06187-0