1980
DOI: 10.2307/2259251
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seasonal Movement of Nutrients in Plants of Differing Growth Form in an Alaskan Tundra Ecosystem: Implications for Herbivory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 322 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In grasslands, these kinds of larger scale temporal and spatial extrapolations were supported when relating H with dominance and temporal stability at the species level but not at the community level (Yu et al 2010). In contrast with herbaceous grassland communities, tundra contains species that differ strongly in growth forms and life history strategies (Chapin et al 1980;Chapin and Shaver 1988). Therefore, our study here should be interpreted as a starting point, and further extensive research may be required using longer-term nutrient addition experiments, natural environmental gradients of soil nutrient availability, multiple samplings throughout the growing season, and better indicators of soil nutrient supply to determine more robust H indices for relating stoichiometric homeostasis to species/community performances at extended temporal and spatial scales.…”
Section: Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In grasslands, these kinds of larger scale temporal and spatial extrapolations were supported when relating H with dominance and temporal stability at the species level but not at the community level (Yu et al 2010). In contrast with herbaceous grassland communities, tundra contains species that differ strongly in growth forms and life history strategies (Chapin et al 1980;Chapin and Shaver 1988). Therefore, our study here should be interpreted as a starting point, and further extensive research may be required using longer-term nutrient addition experiments, natural environmental gradients of soil nutrient availability, multiple samplings throughout the growing season, and better indicators of soil nutrient supply to determine more robust H indices for relating stoichiometric homeostasis to species/community performances at extended temporal and spatial scales.…”
Section: Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The vegetation of low Arctic tundra includes evergreen shrubs, deciduous shrubs, graminoids, and forbs (Chapin et al 1980) that all differ in their growth rate, stature, storage capacity, organ longevity, and nutrient allocation patterns among tissues Shaver 1988, 1989). These differences may lead to growth-form-specific H values across different plant species and age-and tissue-specific H values for a given species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Before defoliation, trees essentially translocate (i.e., reabsorb) nutrients (i.e., essential elements) from senescent leaves to the tree body or newly developed portions prior to shedding their leaves irrespective of the leaf habit [5,6]. The translocated nutrient is recycled to develop new leaves and other parts.…”
Section: Translocation Of Essential Elements In Treesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, the extended leaf longevities of evergreen species appear to be better than the yearly defoliation of deciduous species. The direct delivery of nutrients from senescent leaves to newly developing parts in evergreen species diminishes the chances of nutritional loss and ensures the growth more efficiently [5,[7][8][9][10][11].…”
Section: Translocation Of Essential Elements In Treesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Observational studies and fecal analysis of Rangifer in Alaska have indicated that 45%-50% of spring and summer forage consists of deciduous shrubs, including willow and birch species, while the remainder of the diet predominantly consists of forbs, grasses, sedges, and lichens (Trudell and White 1981;Boertje 1984;Russell et al 1993). The quality of forage available to caribou varies over the summer as plants undergo both structural and chemical changes from emergence to senescence (Chapin et al 1980). Increasing concentrations of structural compounds (e.g., fiber) and plant secondary metabolites (e.g., tannins and phenolic residues; Kuropat 1984;Chapin et al 1986) reduce digestible concentrations of energy and protein in the plant, while total biomass increases with vegetative growth (Johnstone et al 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%