Response to heavy nitrogen applications in fertilizer experiments in British forests.

Abstract

Increasing concern over the level of nitrogen inputs to forests in polluted rain has led to a number of suggestions of possible adverse consequences under the general heading of nitrogen saturation. A saturated ecosystem may be one (a) in which the trees show no growth response to the addition of further nitrogen, (b) in which addition of further nitrogen leads to growth disturbances or reduction, or (c) in which elevated nitrogen inputs lead to increased losses of nitrate in streamwater. Experience gained from forest fertilizer experiments is used to examine each of these suggestions. A definition involving a lack of growth response (a) is shown to be based on a lack of understanding of the continuing changing patterns of nitrogen demand and mineralization in even-aged forests. Similarly, using growth disturbances (b) is unsatisfactory because, it is suggested, these are either secondary deficiencies that appear once growth accelerates with added nitrogen or are a consequence of changing growth with increasing size. A definition based on increased loss of nitrate is, by analogy with the situation for sulphate, at least superficially attractive. However, the fact that nitrate retention is predominantly biological, rather than chemical, makes for difficulties and the limited evidence available suggests that many exceptions and variations may exist. Whilst experience with forest fertilizers might not be entirely apposite, for example foliar uptake from polluted rain may be a factor, it is urged that at least any hypothesis put forward should be compatible with information gained from fertilizer trials.