Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure

As an alternative to clear-cutting, variable-retention harvesting is now standard forest management practice on the coast of British Columbia and in temperate forests globally, due to the benefits associated with maintaining mature forest species and forest structural diversity. Although there is so...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Carolyn Churchland, Per Bengtson, Cindy E. Prescott, Sue J. Grayston
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-01-01
Series:Frontiers in Forests and Global Change
Subjects:
Mn
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2020.609216/full
id doaj-139c0839939747c283beee2a4aa17bb9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-139c0839939747c283beee2a4aa17bb92021-01-12T06:16:09ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Forests and Global Change2624-893X2021-01-01310.3389/ffgc.2020.609216609216Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community StructureCarolyn Churchland0Per Bengtson1Cindy E. Prescott2Sue J. Grayston3Belowground Ecosystem Group, Department of Forest Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CanadaDepartment of Biology–Microbial Ecology, Lund University, Lund, SwedenBelowground Ecosystem Group, Department of Forest Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CanadaBelowground Ecosystem Group, Department of Forest Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CanadaAs an alternative to clear-cutting, variable-retention harvesting is now standard forest management practice on the coast of British Columbia and in temperate forests globally, due to the benefits associated with maintaining mature forest species and forest structural diversity. Although there is some evidence that variable-retention harvesting, particularly single-tree (dispersed) retention will mitigate the impacts of clear-cutting on soil microbial communities and nutrient cycling, findings have been inconsistent. We examined microbial community structure (phospholipid-fatty acid), and nutrient availability (PRSTM probes) in a large (aggregated) retention patch and over three harvesting treatments: dispersed retention, clear-cut and clear-cut edge 2 years after harvest. Unlike previous studies, we did not observe elevated nitrate in the harvested areas, instead ammonium was elevated. Availability of N and other nutrients were surprisingly similar between the dispersed-retention treatment and the retention patch. The microbial community, however, was different in the clear-cut and dispersed-retention treatments, mostly due to significantly lower abundance of fungi combined with an increase in bacteria, specifically Gram-negative bacteria. This was accompanied by lower δ13CPDB value of the Gram-negative PLFA's in these treatments, suggesting the decline in mycorrhizal fungal abundance may have allowed the dominant Gram-negative bacteria to access more of the recently photosynthesized C. This shift in the microbial community composition in the dispersed-retention treatment did not appear to have a major impact on microbial functioning and nutrient availability, indicating that this harvesting practice is more effective at maintaining generic microbial functions/processes. However, as Mn levels were twice as high in the retention patch compared to the harvested treatments, indicating the other “narrow” processes (i.e., those performed by a small number of specialized microorganisms), such as lignin degradation, catalyzed by Mn peroxidase, which concomitantly removes Mn from solution, may be more sensitive to harvesting regimes. The effect of harvesting on such narrow nutrient cycling processes requires further investigation.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2020.609216/fullvariable-retention harvestingmicrobial community structurenitrogenMnsoil respirationPLFA
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Carolyn Churchland
Per Bengtson
Cindy E. Prescott
Sue J. Grayston
spellingShingle Carolyn Churchland
Per Bengtson
Cindy E. Prescott
Sue J. Grayston
Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
Frontiers in Forests and Global Change
variable-retention harvesting
microbial community structure
nitrogen
Mn
soil respiration
PLFA
author_facet Carolyn Churchland
Per Bengtson
Cindy E. Prescott
Sue J. Grayston
author_sort Carolyn Churchland
title Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
title_short Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
title_full Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
title_fullStr Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
title_full_unstemmed Dispersed Variable-Retention Harvesting Mitigates N Losses on Harvested Sites in Conjunction With Changes in Soil Microbial Community Structure
title_sort dispersed variable-retention harvesting mitigates n losses on harvested sites in conjunction with changes in soil microbial community structure
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Forests and Global Change
issn 2624-893X
publishDate 2021-01-01
description As an alternative to clear-cutting, variable-retention harvesting is now standard forest management practice on the coast of British Columbia and in temperate forests globally, due to the benefits associated with maintaining mature forest species and forest structural diversity. Although there is some evidence that variable-retention harvesting, particularly single-tree (dispersed) retention will mitigate the impacts of clear-cutting on soil microbial communities and nutrient cycling, findings have been inconsistent. We examined microbial community structure (phospholipid-fatty acid), and nutrient availability (PRSTM probes) in a large (aggregated) retention patch and over three harvesting treatments: dispersed retention, clear-cut and clear-cut edge 2 years after harvest. Unlike previous studies, we did not observe elevated nitrate in the harvested areas, instead ammonium was elevated. Availability of N and other nutrients were surprisingly similar between the dispersed-retention treatment and the retention patch. The microbial community, however, was different in the clear-cut and dispersed-retention treatments, mostly due to significantly lower abundance of fungi combined with an increase in bacteria, specifically Gram-negative bacteria. This was accompanied by lower δ13CPDB value of the Gram-negative PLFA's in these treatments, suggesting the decline in mycorrhizal fungal abundance may have allowed the dominant Gram-negative bacteria to access more of the recently photosynthesized C. This shift in the microbial community composition in the dispersed-retention treatment did not appear to have a major impact on microbial functioning and nutrient availability, indicating that this harvesting practice is more effective at maintaining generic microbial functions/processes. However, as Mn levels were twice as high in the retention patch compared to the harvested treatments, indicating the other “narrow” processes (i.e., those performed by a small number of specialized microorganisms), such as lignin degradation, catalyzed by Mn peroxidase, which concomitantly removes Mn from solution, may be more sensitive to harvesting regimes. The effect of harvesting on such narrow nutrient cycling processes requires further investigation.
topic variable-retention harvesting
microbial community structure
nitrogen
Mn
soil respiration
PLFA
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2020.609216/full
work_keys_str_mv AT carolynchurchland dispersedvariableretentionharvestingmitigatesnlossesonharvestedsitesinconjunctionwithchangesinsoilmicrobialcommunitystructure
AT perbengtson dispersedvariableretentionharvestingmitigatesnlossesonharvestedsitesinconjunctionwithchangesinsoilmicrobialcommunitystructure
AT cindyeprescott dispersedvariableretentionharvestingmitigatesnlossesonharvestedsitesinconjunctionwithchangesinsoilmicrobialcommunitystructure
AT suejgrayston dispersedvariableretentionharvestingmitigatesnlossesonharvestedsitesinconjunctionwithchangesinsoilmicrobialcommunitystructure
_version_ 1724340630201565184