Freja Butler

and 3 more

1. Grassy ecosystems cover ~40% of the global land surface and are an integral component of the global carbon cycle. Grass litter decomposes via a combination of ultraviolet radiation degradation (which returns carbon to the atmosphere rapidly) and biological decomposition (a slower carbon pathway). As such, decomposition and carbon storage in grasslands may vary with climate and exposure to solar radiation. We investigated rates of grass litter decomposition in Australian temperate grasslands along a climate gradient to uncouple the relative importance of UV radiation and climate on decomposition. 2. Litterbags containing two common native grass species were deployed at six grassland sites across a precipitation gradient (380-890 mm) in south-eastern Australia. Bags were retrieved over 39 weeks to measure mass loss from decomposition. We used shade treatments to partition UV degradation from biological decomposition. 3. The shade treatment consistently reduced the rate of decomposition relative to full-sun treatments at all sites; there was no significant difference in the effect size of the shade treatment among sites. The rate of decomposition was positively correlated with rainfall midway through the experiment, but there were no significant differences in total decomposition among sites after 39 weeks. In general, the shape of decomposition curves was more linear than has typically been observed in global decomposition studies. 4. Synthesis: We found that UV exposure was a strong contributor to litter decomposition in temperate Australian grasslands. This effect was not influenced by climatic variables and may be related to a period of photopriming prior to further biotic decomposition. This study highlights the importance of litter composition and UV exposure in our understanding of how decomposition patterns contribute to global carbon cycling.

Sylvia Haider

and 57 more

Climate change and other global change drivers threaten plant diversity in mountains worldwide. A widely documented response to such environmental modifications is for plant species to change their elevational ranges. Range shifts are often idiosyncratic and difficult to generalize, partly due to variation in sampling methods. There is thus a need for a standardized monitoring strategy that can be applied across mountain regions to assess distribution changes and community turnover of native and non-native plant species over space and time. Here, we present a conceptually intuitive and standardized protocol developed by the Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN) to systematically quantify global patterns of native and non-native species distributions along elevation gradients and shifts arising from interactive effects of climate change and human disturbance. Usually repeated every five years, surveys consist of 20 sample sites located at equal elevation increments along three replicate roads per sampling region. At each site, three plots extend from the side of a mountain road into surrounding natural vegetation. The protocol has been successfully used in 18 regions worldwide from 2007 to present. Analyses of one point in time already generated some salient results, and revealed region-specific elevational patterns of native plant species richness, but a globally consistent elevational decline in non-native species richness. Non-native plants were also more abundant directly adjacent to road edges, suggesting that disturbed roadsides serve as a vector for invasions into mountains. From the upcoming analyses of time series even more exciting results especially about range shifts can be expected. Implementing the protocol in more mountain regions globally would help to generate a more complete picture of how global change alters species distributions. This would inform conservation policy in mountain ecosystems, where some conservation policies remain poorly implemented.
Dominant and non-dominant plants could be subject to different biotic and abiotic influences, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where non-dominant plants grow, causing an interaction asymmetry. Among other possibilities, if dominant plants compete strongly, they should deplete most resources forcing non-dominant plants into a more constrained niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not fully deplete available resources but instead ameliorate some of the environmental constraints limiting non-dominants. Hence, the nature of the interactions between the non-dominants could be modified by dominant species. However, when plant competition and environmental constraints have similar effects on dominant and non-dominant species no difference is expected. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (underdispersed), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that non-dominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends, but insufficient data prevented further analyses. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more non-dominant species, suggesting that traits related to non-dominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We found some environmental drivers of the dominant—non-dominant disparity. Our results indicate that assembly patterns for dominants and non-dominants are different, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different mechanisms we evaluated, the results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Non-dominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by the dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to non-dominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger effect on—at least—some non-dominants by ameliorating the impact of the environment on them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those non-dominants. The results show that the dominant–non-dominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities.