Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by ...
View graph of relations

Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits?

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits? / Baxendale, Catherine; Orwin, Kate; Poly, Franck et al.
In: New Phytologist, Vol. 204, No. 2, 10.2014, p. 408-423.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Baxendale C, Orwin K, Poly F, Pommier T, Bardgett R. Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits? New Phytologist. 2014 Oct;204(2):408-423. doi: 10.1111/nph.12915

Author

Baxendale, Catherine ; Orwin, Kate ; Poly, Franck et al. / Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits?. In: New Phytologist. 2014 ; Vol. 204, No. 2. pp. 408-423.

Bibtex

@article{2fd07fcc50c5403495c4219f47cb7063,
title = "Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits?",
abstract = "Plant–soil feedbacks can influence plant growth and community structure by modifying soil biota and nutrients. Because most research has been performed at the species level and in monoculture, our ability to predict responses across species and in mixed communities is limited. As plant traits have been linked to both soil properties and plant growth, they may provide a useful approach for an understanding of feedbacks at a generic level.We measured how monocultures and mixtures of grassland plant species with differing traits responded to soil that had been conditioned by model grassland plant communities dominated by either slow- or fast-growing species.Soils conditioned by the fast-growing community had higher nitrogen availability than those conditioned by the slow-growing community; these changes influenced future plant growth. Effects were stronger, and plant traits had greater predictive power, in mixtures than in monocultures. In monoculture, all species produced more above-ground biomass in soil conditioned by the fast-growing community. In mixtures, slow-growing species produced more above-ground biomass, and fast-growing species produced more below-ground biomass, in soils conditioned by species with similar traits.The use of a plant trait-based approach may therefore improve our understanding of differential plant species responses to plant–soil feedbacks, especially in a mixed-species environment.",
keywords = "competition, competitive ability , plant–soil feedback responses , plant traits , soil conditioning",
author = "Catherine Baxendale and Kate Orwin and Franck Poly and Thomas Pommier and Richard Bardgett",
year = "2014",
month = oct,
doi = "10.1111/nph.12915",
language = "English",
volume = "204",
pages = "408--423",
journal = "New Phytologist",
issn = "0028-646X",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are plant-soil feedback responses explained by plant traits?

AU - Baxendale, Catherine

AU - Orwin, Kate

AU - Poly, Franck

AU - Pommier, Thomas

AU - Bardgett, Richard

PY - 2014/10

Y1 - 2014/10

N2 - Plant–soil feedbacks can influence plant growth and community structure by modifying soil biota and nutrients. Because most research has been performed at the species level and in monoculture, our ability to predict responses across species and in mixed communities is limited. As plant traits have been linked to both soil properties and plant growth, they may provide a useful approach for an understanding of feedbacks at a generic level.We measured how monocultures and mixtures of grassland plant species with differing traits responded to soil that had been conditioned by model grassland plant communities dominated by either slow- or fast-growing species.Soils conditioned by the fast-growing community had higher nitrogen availability than those conditioned by the slow-growing community; these changes influenced future plant growth. Effects were stronger, and plant traits had greater predictive power, in mixtures than in monocultures. In monoculture, all species produced more above-ground biomass in soil conditioned by the fast-growing community. In mixtures, slow-growing species produced more above-ground biomass, and fast-growing species produced more below-ground biomass, in soils conditioned by species with similar traits.The use of a plant trait-based approach may therefore improve our understanding of differential plant species responses to plant–soil feedbacks, especially in a mixed-species environment.

AB - Plant–soil feedbacks can influence plant growth and community structure by modifying soil biota and nutrients. Because most research has been performed at the species level and in monoculture, our ability to predict responses across species and in mixed communities is limited. As plant traits have been linked to both soil properties and plant growth, they may provide a useful approach for an understanding of feedbacks at a generic level.We measured how monocultures and mixtures of grassland plant species with differing traits responded to soil that had been conditioned by model grassland plant communities dominated by either slow- or fast-growing species.Soils conditioned by the fast-growing community had higher nitrogen availability than those conditioned by the slow-growing community; these changes influenced future plant growth. Effects were stronger, and plant traits had greater predictive power, in mixtures than in monocultures. In monoculture, all species produced more above-ground biomass in soil conditioned by the fast-growing community. In mixtures, slow-growing species produced more above-ground biomass, and fast-growing species produced more below-ground biomass, in soils conditioned by species with similar traits.The use of a plant trait-based approach may therefore improve our understanding of differential plant species responses to plant–soil feedbacks, especially in a mixed-species environment.

KW - competition

KW - competitive ability

KW - plant–soil feedback responses

KW - plant traits

KW - soil conditioning

U2 - 10.1111/nph.12915

DO - 10.1111/nph.12915

M3 - Journal article

VL - 204

SP - 408

EP - 423

JO - New Phytologist

JF - New Phytologist

SN - 0028-646X

IS - 2

ER -