Long‐term nutrient addition alters arthropod community composition but does not increase total biomass or abundance

dc.contributor.author Asmus, Ashley
dc.contributor.author Koltz, Amanda
dc.contributor.author McLaren, Jennie
dc.contributor.author Shaver, Gaius R.
dc.contributor.author Gough, Laura
dc.date.accessioned 2018-04-12T15:17:41Z
dc.date.available 2018-10-12T16:43:46Z
dc.date.issued 2017-09
dc.description Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2017. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of John Wiley & Sons for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Oikos 127 (2018): 460-471, doi:10.1111/oik.04398. en_US
dc.description.abstract A simple bottom–up hypothesis predicts that plant responses to nutrient addition should determine the response of consumers: more productive and less diverse plant communities, the usual result of long‐term nutrient addition, should support greater consumer abundances and biomass and less consumer diversity. We tested this hypothesis for the response of an aboveground arthropod community to an uncommonly long‐term (24‐year) nutrient addition experiment in moist acidic tundra in arctic Alaska. This experiment altered plant community composition, decreased plant diversity and increased plant production and biomass as a deciduous shrub, Betula nana, became dominant. Consistent with strong effects on the plant community, nutrient addition altered arthropod community composition, primarily through changes to herbivore taxa in the canopy‐dwelling arthropod assemblage and detritivore taxa in the ground assemblage. Surprisingly, however, the loss of more than half of plant species was accompanied by negligible changes to diversity (rarefied richness) of arthropod taxa (which were primarily identified to family). Similarly, although long‐term nutrient addition in this system roughly doubles plant production and biomass, arthropod abundance was either unchanged or decreased by nutrient addition, and total arthropod biomass was unaffected. Our findings differ markedly from the handful of terrestrial studies that have found bottom‐up diversity cascades and productivity responses by consumers to nutrient addition. This is probably because unlike grasslands and salt marshes (where such studies have historically been conducted), this arctic tundra community becomes less palatable, rather than more so, after many years of nutrient addition due to increased dominance of B. nana. Additionally, by displacing insulating mosses and increasing the cover of shrubs that cool and shade the canopy microenvironment, fertilization may displace arthropods keenly attuned to microclimate. These results indicate that terrestrial arthropod assemblages may be more constrained by producer traits (i.e. palatability, structure) than they are by total primary production or producer diversity. en_US
dc.description.embargo 2018-10-07 en_US
dc.description.sponsorship National Science Foundation Grants DEB 102683 to support the Arctic LTER to G. Shaver, OPP 0908502 to L. Gough, and DEB 1210704 to A. Koltz, as well as funding from CREOi and the National Geographic Committee for Research and Exploration to A. Koltz en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/1912/10232
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.relation.uri https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.04398
dc.title Long‐term nutrient addition alters arthropod community composition but does not increase total biomass or abundance en_US
dc.type Preprint en_US
dspace.entity.type Publication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication 78eb4eed-3b11-4d3f-b908-20c1504c2da8
relation.isAuthorOfPublication c97d8c50-88c4-494e-8c7c-097d8525bbdf
relation.isAuthorOfPublication 272b9603-a177-4493-81ee-bf9c341a40d3
relation.isAuthorOfPublication 0656be26-4b7b-4b2c-b549-5a9fad64a9ba
relation.isAuthorOfPublication 42914331-9aef-447b-958a-3d2002207d5c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery 78eb4eed-3b11-4d3f-b908-20c1504c2da8
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Asmus_BugsAndFert_Oikos_RevisionSubmitted0917.pdf
Size:
1.07 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.89 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: