Decomposition of broadleaf and needle litter in forests of British Columbia: influences of litter type, forest type, and litter mixtures

By C. Prescott, L. Zabek, C. Staley, R. Kabzems. 2000

396 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/db85f52074a77dd8df13a4251094e1e4f5b49be4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Insect Science

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Multiple mechanisms for trait effects on litter decomposition: moving beyond home‐field advantage with a new hypothesis (2012, background): “However, while the theory underlying the HFA hypothesis is progressively taking shape, evidence for HFA effects is strongly context dependent (Prescott et al. 2000; Ayres, Dromph & Bardgett 2006; Chapman & Koch 2007).”
The ecology of soil decomposition (2003, background): “In some combinations, there may be no effect at all on the mass loss rate in mixed species litter (Blair et al., 1990; Prescott et al., 2000).”
Decomposition dynamics in mixed‐species leaf litter (2004, neutral): “) over a 5-yr period (Prescott et al. 2000).”
Seasonal differences in tree species influence on soil microbial communities (2013, background): “As a function of litter quality, differences during the first year of decomposition can strongly alter the amounts of nutrients that are released into the soil and that can then be absorbed bymicroorganisms (Prescott et al., 2000).”
No ‘home’ versus ‘away’ effects of decomposition found in a grassland–forest reciprocal litter transplant study (2011, background): “230) (Barlow et al., 2007; Bocock et al., 1960; Castanho and de Oliveira, 2008; González et al., 2003; Hobbie et al., 2006; McClaugherty et al., 1985; Prescott et al., 2000; Rothstein et al., 2004; Vivanco and Austin, 2008).”
Soil biota accelerate decomposition in high‐elevation forests by specializing in the breakdown of litter produced by the plant species above them (2009, background): “Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society HFA is not always observed (Prescott et al. 2000; Chapman & Koch 2007).”
Plant species richness and diversity along an altitudinal gradient in the Sierra Nevada, Mexico (2005, background): “Organic matter decays slowly in soils that are subjected to low temperatures, resulting in an excess accumulation of humus, which limits soil productivity (Prescott et al., 2000) and reduces vascular plant nutrient consumption (Waide et al.”
Effects of Tree Species Diversity on Litter Quality and Decomposition (2005, background): “Litter mass loss and mineralization rates can vary substantially among forest sites differing in tree species richness or composition (Chapman et al. 1988; Prescott et al. 2000; Zimmer 2002).”
Soil CO 2 efflux from a podzolic forest soil before and after forest clear-cutting and site preparation (2004, methodology): “However, according to Berg et al. (1984) and Prescott et al. (2000a, 2000b), the decomposition rate of litter is not linear, instead slowing down over time.”
Effects of litter diversity on decomposition and biological colonization of submerged litter in temperate and tropical streams (2012, background): “Results from this design are less ambiguous than those from decomposition of entire litter mixtures, in which opposing effects of component species might mask an effect of litter diversity (Leff and McArthur 1989, Prescott et al. 2000, Gonçalves and Canhoto 2009, Sanpera-Calbet et al. 2009).”
Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: a synthesis (2001, neutral): “) in British Columbia showed no effect of mixtures (Prescott et al. 2000).”