Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Microbial ecoenzyme stoichiometry, nutrient limitation, and organic matter decomposition in wetlands of the conterminous United States

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Wetlands Ecology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Microbial respiration (Rm) and ecoenzyme activities (EEA) related to microbial carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus acquisition were measured in 792 freshwater and estuarine wetlands (representing a cumulative area of 217,480 km2) across the continental United States as part of the US EPA’s 2011 National Wetland Condition Assessment. EEA stoichiometry was used to construct models for and assess nutrient limitation, carbon use efficiency (CUE), and organic matter decomposition (− k). The wetlands were classified into ten groups based on aggregated ecoregion and wetland type. The wetlands were also assigned to least, intermediate, and most disturbed classes, based on the extent of human influences. Ecoenzyme activity related to C, N and P acquisition, Rm, CUE, and − k differed among ecoregion–wetland types and, with the exception of C acquisition and − k, among disturbance classes. Rm and EEA were positively correlated with soil C, N and P content (r = 0.15–0.64) and stoichiometry (r = 0.15–0.48), and negatively correlated with an index of carbon quality (r = − 0.22 to − 0.39). EEA stoichiometry revealed that wetlands were more often P- than N-limited, and that P-limitation increases with increasing disturbance. Our enzyme-based approach for modeling C, N, and P acquisition, and organic matter decomposition, all rooted in stoichiometric theory, provides a mechanism for modeling resource limitations of microbial metabolism and biogeochemical cycling in wetlands. Given the ease of collecting and analyzing soil EEA and their response to wetland disturbance gradients, enzyme stoichiometry models are a cost-effective tool for monitoring ecosystem responses to resource availability and the environmental drivers of microbial metabolism, including those related to global climate changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alvarez S, Guerrero MC (2000) Enzymatic activities associated with decomposition of particulate organic matter in two shallow ponds. Soil Biol Biochem 32:1941–1951

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bedford BL, Walbridge MR, Aldous A (1999) Patterns of nutrient availability and plant diversity of temperate North American wetlands. Ecology 80:2151–2169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridgham SD, Megonigal JP, Keller JK, Bliss NB, Trettin C (2006) The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinson MM, Lugo AE, Brown S (1981) Primary productivity, decomposition and consumer activity in freshwater wetlands. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 12:123–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broberg A (1985) A modified method for studies of electron transport system activity in freshwater sediments. Hydrobiologia 120:181–187

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cleveland CC, Liptzin D (2007) C/N/P stoichiometry in soil: is there a “redfield ratio” for the microbial biomass? Biogeochemistry 85:235–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE (2011) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 2004–2009. US Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE, Bergeson MT (2009) Technical procedures for conducting status and trends of the Nation’s wetlands. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Foreman CM, Franchini P, Sinsabaugh RL (1998) The trophic dynamics of riverine bacterioplankton, relationships among substrate availability, ectoenzyme kinetics and growth. Limnol Oceanogr 43:1344–1352

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • German DP, Weintraub MN, Grandy AS, Lauber CL, Rinkes ZL, Allison SD (2011) Optimization of hydrolytic and oxidative enzyme methods for ecosystem studies. Soil Biol Biochem 43:1387–1397

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gorham E (1991) Northern peatlands, role in the carbon cycle and probable responses to climate warming. Ecol Appl 1:182–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herlihy AT, Kentula ME, Magee TK, Lomnicky GA, Nahlik AM, Serenbetz G (2008) Striving for consistency in the National wetland condition assessment: developing a reference condition approach for assessing wetlands at a continental scale. Environ Monit Assess 27:860–877

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill BH, Elonen CM, Jicha TM, Cotter AM, Trebitz AS, Danz NP (2006) Sediment microbial enzyme activity as an indicator of nutrient limitation in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Freshw Biol 51:1670–1683

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hill BH, Elonen CM, Jicha TM, Kolka RK, Lehto LLP, Sebestyen SD, Seifert-Monson LR (2014) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial processing of organic matter in northern bogs and fens reveals a common P-limitation between peatlands. Biogeochemistry 120:203–224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson CR, Foreman CM, Sinsabaugh RL (1995) Microbial activities as indicators or organic matter processing rates in a Lake Erie coastal wetland. Freshw Biol 34:329–342

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kayranli B, Scholz M, Mustafa A, Hedmark A (2010) Carbon storage and fluxes within freshwater wetlands: a critical review. Wetlands 30:111–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keiblinger KM, Hall EK, Wanek W, Szukics U, Hammerle I, Ellerdorfer G, Bock S, Straus J, Sterflinger K, Richter A, Zechmeister-Boltenstern S (2010) The effect of resource quantity and resource stoichiometry on microbial carbon-use-efficiency FEMS. Microb Ecol 73:430–440

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lachat Instruments (2009) Methods list for automated ion analyzers: flow injection, ion chromatography. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, p 40p

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzoni S, Taylor P, Richter A, Porporato A, Agren GI (2012) Environmental and stoichiometric controls on microbial carbon-use efficiency in soils. New Phytol 196:79–91

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra S, Wassmann R, Vlek PLG (2005) An appraisal of global wetland area and its organic carbon stock. Curr Sci 88:25–35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Bernal B, Nahlik AM, Mander U, Zhang L, Anderson CJ, Jorgensen SE, Brix H (2013) Wetlands, carbon, and climate change. Landsc Ecol 28:583–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorhead DL, Lashermes G, Sinsabaugh RL (2012) A theoretical model of C- and N-acquiring exoenzyme activities, which balances microbial demands during decomposition. Soil Biol Biochem 53:133–141

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nahlik AM, Fennessy MS (2016) Carbon storage in US wetlands. Nat Commun 7:13835

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen AR, Kincaid TM, Kentula ME, Weber MH. Survey design to assess condition of wetlands in the United States. Environ Monit Assess (in press)

  • Rejmankova E, Houdkova K (2006) Wetland plant decomposition under different nutrient conditions: what is more important, litter quality or site quality? Biogeochemistry 80:245–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimel JP, Weintraub MN (2003) The implications or exoenzyme activity on microbial carbon and nitrogen limitation in soil: a theoretical model. Soil Biol Biochem 35:549–563

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Follstad Shah JJ (2011) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of recalcitrant organic matter decomposition: the growth rate hypothesis in reverse. Biogeochemistry 102:31–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Foreman CM (2001) Activity profiles of bacterioplankton in a eutrophic river. Freshw Biol 46:1239–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Moorhead DL (1994) Resource allocation to extracellular enzyme production: a model for nitrogen and phosphorus control of litter decomposition. Soil Biol Biochem 26:1305–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Findlay S, Franchini P, Fisher D (1997) Enzymatic analysis of riverine bacterioplankton production. Limnol Oceanogr 42:29–38

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Hill BH, Follstad Shah JJ (2009) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment. Nature 462:795–798

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Follstad Shah JJ, Hill BH, Elonen CM (2012) Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of stream sediments with comparison to terrestrial soils. Biogeochemistry 111:455–467

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinsabaugh RL, Manzoni S, Moorhead DL, Richter A (2013) Carbon use efficiency of microbial communities: stoichiometry, methodology and modeling. Ecol Lett 16:930–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens DL, Olsen AR (2004) Spatially-balanced sampling of natural resources. J Am Stat Assoc 99:262–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2011) National wetland condition assessment: field operations manual. EPA-843-R-10-001. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2016) National wetland condition assessment: 2011 technical report. EPA-843-R-15-006. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The data from the 2011 NWCA used in this paper resulted from the collective efforts of dedicated field crews, laboratory staff, data management and quality control staff, analysts and many others from EPA, states, tribes, federal agencies, universities and other organizations. For questions about these data, please contact http://nars-hq@epa.gov. This work was partially supported by Grant #RD-83425201 from the National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) STAR Program of the US Environmental Protection Agency to ATH. ATH was also supported on this project via an intergovernmental personnel agreement with the US EPA Office of Water. The authors thank Dr. Anett Trebitz for her comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products do not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, 6201 Congdon Blvd., Duluth, MN, 55804, USA

    Brian H. Hill, Colleen M. Elonen & Terri M. Jicha

  2. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA

    Alan T. Herlihy

  3. Office of Water, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 20460, USA

    Gregg Serenbetz

Authors
  1. Brian H. Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Colleen M. Elonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alan T. Herlihy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Terri M. Jicha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gregg Serenbetz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian H. Hill.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 61 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hill, B.H., Elonen, C.M., Herlihy, A.T. et al. Microbial ecoenzyme stoichiometry, nutrient limitation, and organic matter decomposition in wetlands of the conterminous United States. Wetlands Ecol Manage 26, 425–439 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9584-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9584-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation