Long-Term Fire Regime Modifies Carbon and Nutrient Dynamics in Decomposing Eucalyptus pilularis Leaf Litter

Orpheus M. Butler,Mehran Rezaei Rashti,Chengrong Chen,Tom Lewis

doi:10.3389/ffgc.2020.00022

Abstract

The changes in fire regimes expected under climate change are likely to disrupt the biogeochemical cycling of carbon (C) and nutrients in forest ecosystems. Plant litter decomposition is a critical step in the terrestrial biogeochemical cycle, and is an important determinant of fire fuel load and forest C balance. We conducted a 277-day leaf litter decomposition experiment in an Australian eucalypt forest to test whether three contrasting, long-term fire regimes (no burning [NB], 4-yearly burning, and 2-yearly burning) were associated with different C and nutrient dynamics during litter decomposition. Fire regime had strong effects on many litter properties, including overall rates of decomposition and C loss, which were greatest in the NB treatment, suggesting that fire regime can modify the rate at which C is returned from litter to soil or the atmosphere. This has potentially important implications for soil C storage and atmospheric CO2 concentrations under a changing climate. High-frequency fire was associated with litter nutrient depletion and high microbial nutrient demand, but did not affect nutrient loss rates from decomposing litter, suggesting conservative use and retention of nutrients by the litter microbial biomass. These effects differed qualitatively between 2- and 4-yearly burning regimes, and they show how decadal-scale increases in fire frequency might contribute to soil nutrient depletion by disrupting decomposition. Many effects of fire regime on litter properties throughout decomposition were sensitive to litter bag re-collection date, suggesting that seasonal factors moderate the effects of fire regime, and that the role of fire regime-altered litter chemistry in shaping decomposition may be secondary to that of fire regime-altered environmental variables. Together, our findings highlight the potential consequences of long-term increases in prescribed fire frequency for litter decomposition and the storage and cycling of C and nutrients in eucalypt forests, and reveal the specific importance of average burn frequency in this context.

Highlights

Vegetation fires currently affect 360–380 million hectares of the Earth’s terrestrial surface each year (Alonso-Canas and Chuvieco, 2015)
The effects of fire regime on the rates of E. pilularis litter mass loss as determined by our litter bag experiment have already been described by Butler et al (2019b), who showed that the rates of microbially-driven litter decomposition were 42.1 and 23.6% slower in the 4-yearly prescribed burning (4yB) and 2yB treatments, respectively, than in the no burning (NB) treatment
The results of our ANOVA of litter mass loss over the four bag re-collection dates were consistent with this (Figure 2); the significant interaction between fire regime and litter bag re-collection date indicates that the effect of fire regime was strong at the end of the experimental decomposition period

Summary

Introduction

Vegetation fires currently affect 360–380 million hectares of the Earth’s terrestrial surface each year (Alonso-Canas and Chuvieco, 2015). Fire regimes are shifting worldwide due to climate change such that the extent, severity, and frequency of wild and prescribed fires are increasing in many ecosystems (Liu et al, 2010; Abatzoglou and Williams, 2016; Boer et al, 2016). Long-term changes in ecosystem C cycling processes associated with decadal-scale changes in fire regime can increase or reduce an ecosystem’s tendency to store C in soil and vegetation (e.g., Carney et al, 2007; Pellegrini et al, 2018), while changes in ecosystem nutrient cycling and availability can affect ecosystem productivity (e.g., Dijkstra et al, 2017) and, in doing so, alter the ability of vegetation to fix atmospheric CO2 (Conroy et al, 1992; McGuire et al, 1995). The effects of long-term fire regime on C and nutrient cycling have strong potential to feed back into the global climate system (Bowman et al, 2009)

Methods

Results

Conclusion