Out of sight… What can be done in order to further include the belowground compartment in vegetation studies?
To know the structure and functioning of the belowground vegetation compartment is essential to understand numerous processes that occur at different organization levels. However, the belowground vegetation compartment has traditionally been less studied than the above layer due to the great effort required for field sampling and laboratory processing. In the XXVIII Reunión Argentina de Ecología, Mar del Plata 2018, two symposia about the importance of root knowledge in ecological studies were conducted. From this exchange arose the need to 1) quantify studies that include data of belowground and aboveground vegetation, and 2) determine the methodologies and the variables of the belowground compartment recorded in natural (grasslands, steppes, forests, shrubs, and desert) and human modified systems (pastures, crops) in six Argentinean phytogeographic provinces and in two Uruguayan geomorphological regions. There were 933 published studies from 1990 to 2019. The 57% and 23% corresponded to exclusive studies of the above and belowground compartments respectively, with an exponential increase in the time of both fractions. Currently, there is a tendency to incorporate the underground compartment in ecological studies. Through systematic analysis, it was found that six sampling methods were used (soil core, ingrowth cores, trench, monoliths, rhizotron and belowground biomass estimation from aboveground biomass) where four variables of the belowground vegetation compartment were recorded (belowground biomass, belowground net primary productivity, root traits, and roots decomposition rate). Obtaining soil volumes by soil core was the most used method, while belowground biomass was the most evaluated variable. We propose to encourage collaboration between research teams and establish methodological comparisons to understand the scope of the results and obtain better estimates about the consequences of land-use change.
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Digital revista |
| Language: | spa |
| Published: |
Asociación Argentina de Ecología
2020
|
| Online Access: | https://ojs.ecologiaaustral.com.ar/index.php/Ecologia_Austral/article/view/965 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | To know the structure and functioning of the belowground vegetation compartment is essential to understand numerous processes that occur at different organization levels. However, the belowground vegetation compartment has traditionally been less studied than the above layer due to the great effort required for field sampling and laboratory processing. In the XXVIII Reunión Argentina de Ecología, Mar del Plata 2018, two symposia about the importance of root knowledge in ecological studies were conducted. From this exchange arose the need to 1) quantify studies that include data of belowground and aboveground vegetation, and 2) determine the methodologies and the variables of the belowground compartment recorded in natural (grasslands, steppes, forests, shrubs, and desert) and human modified systems (pastures, crops) in six Argentinean phytogeographic provinces and in two Uruguayan geomorphological regions. There were 933 published studies from 1990 to 2019. The 57% and 23% corresponded to exclusive studies of the above and belowground compartments respectively, with an exponential increase in the time of both fractions. Currently, there is a tendency to incorporate the underground compartment in ecological studies. Through systematic analysis, it was found that six sampling methods were used (soil core, ingrowth cores, trench, monoliths, rhizotron and belowground biomass estimation from aboveground biomass) where four variables of the belowground vegetation compartment were recorded (belowground biomass, belowground net primary productivity, root traits, and roots decomposition rate). Obtaining soil volumes by soil core was the most used method, while belowground biomass was the most evaluated variable. We propose to encourage collaboration between research teams and establish methodological comparisons to understand the scope of the results and obtain better estimates about the consequences of land-use change. |
|---|