Comparing the Litter and Duff Thickness Among Lodgepole

Comparing the Litter and Duff Thickness Among Lodgepole Pine and Trembling Aspen Stands Ashli Socorro Vegetation Ecology Summer 2015 CU Mountain Research Station

Introduction Is there a difference in the buildup of litter and duff under stands of Aspen and Pine trees?

Introduction Continued Is there a difference in the buildup of litter and duff under stands of Aspen and Pine trees? Since other studies have shown speciesspecific effects on soil properties, I wanted to take it further to look for a Stand-specific effect

Hypothesis NULL: There is no difference in thickness of the litter and duff layer of the two stands. ALTERNATE: There is a difference in the thickness of the litter and duff layer underneath the two stands.

Methods 5 sites of paired Aspen and Pine stands by Elk Meadow

First, Stratifying Landscape

Paired Lodgepole Pine and Trembling Aspen Stands

Methods Study Design 1 Plot at each of 10 locations to measure percentage of herbaceous cover 1 Habitat App above each plot to measure canopy cover 1 Level App used at each plot to measure slope 3 shovel samples of soil to measure litter and duff

Canopy Cover

Herbaceous Percent Cover

Litter Layer

Duff Layer

Results Presentation of Results and Analysis

Duff Thickness (Pine Had More)

Litter Thickness (Pine Had More)

Litter Thickness Lodgepole Versus Aspen (P=8. 25 x 10^-13) Different Paired Sites (P=. 704) Interaction (P=. 0177) Variance) ANOVA (Analysis of Litter Aspen Litter Pine Litter Thickness (Cm) Site Number (1 -5)

Litter Thickness Lodgepole Versus Aspen (P=. 0001087) Different Paired Sites (P=. 15) Interaction (P=. 139) ANOVA Duff Aspen Duff Pine Duff Thickness (Cm) Site Number (1 -5)

Discussion Scientific Interpretation of results

Discussion Continued The decomposition of leaf litter is largely influenced by the concentrations and ratios of nutrients (Berg and Mc. Claugherty 2008) Another constituent limiting the rate of litter degradation is lignin (e. g. , Melillo et al. 1982; Osono and Takeda 2005)

Conclusion Summarizing and Potential for future research

Conclusion Continued Summarizing Significant difference in the litter and duff layers among Trembling Aspen and Lodgepole Pine stands Future research Test for the effect of slopes on the thickness of the litter and duff layer

Literature Cited Ayres E, Steltzer H, Berg S, Wallenstein MD, Simmons BL, Wall DH (2009) Tree Species Traits Influence Soil Physical, Chemical, and Biological Properties in High Elevation Forests. PLo. S ONE 4(6): e 5964. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0005964 Berg B, Mc. Claugherty C. Plant litter—decomposition, humus formation, carbon sequestration. Berlin: Springer; 2008. Melillo JM, Aber JD, Muratore JF. Nitrogen and lignin control of hardwood leaf litter decomposition dynamics. Ecology. 1982; 63: 621– 626. doi: 10. 2307/1936780. Osono T, Takeda H. Decomposition of organic chemical components in relation to nitrogen dynamics in leaf litter of 14 tree species in a cool temperate forest. Ecol Res. 2005; 20: 41– 49. doi: 10. 1007/s 11284 -0002 -0.

Appendix (for further questions)

Slope was similar at each site 1= Lodgepole Pine Slope mean 2= Trembling Aspen Slope mean

Canopy Cover (Aspen Had More)