“…Surprisingly, species adapted to nutrient-poor environments are not better at capturing nutrients : they do not invest more in their roots (Olff et al, 1990 ;Elberse & Berendse, 1993 ;Vijver et al, 1993 ;Gleeson & Tilman, 1994), nor do they not have generally greater specific root length (SRL) (Ryser & Lambers, 1995) or more root absorption capacity (Chapin, 1980). Although there is some evidence that slow-growing species can respond proportionally more to nutrient patches and pulses (Robinson & Van Vuuren, 1998), the key characteristic of species from nutrient-poor environments is their lower biomass turnover (Berendse et al, 1987 ;Aerts et al, 1990 ;Schla$ pfer & Ryser, 1996) which is responsible for a more efficient nutrient economy (Berendse & Elberse, 1990). Thus it can be stated that species adapted to nutrient-rich environments are characterized by high SSH and SLA, whereas species adapted to nutrient-poor habitats are characterized by low biomass turnover.…”