Predicting microbial nutrient limitations from a stoichiometry-based threshold framework
-
GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT
DownLoad:
Full size image
-
PUBLIC SUMMARY
-
A threshold framework is developed to predict soil microbial nutrient limitations.
The theoretical thresholds are validated by global dataset-based empirical thresholds.
Vector angle of 45° in the ecoenzymatic vector model overestimates microbial phosphorus limitation.
Vector length of 0.61 and angle of 55° can be used as thresholds to identify microbial nutrient limitations.
-
-
ABSTRACT
While ecological stoichiometry-based theories and methodologies have been successfully applied to identify nutrient limitations in plankton and plants (e.g., leaf nutrient resorption ratios), determining nutrient limitations in soil microorganisms by them has great uncertainties. Establishing stoichiometric thresholds that define specific nutrient limitations for soil microbial communities has been a major challenge. Here, we present a threshold framework that predicts the limitations of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) for microbial communities by leveraging the convergence of elemental stoichiometry from soils to microorganisms. Combined with a widely used model of microbial nutrient limitations (i.e., ecoenzyme vector model), the theoretical thresholds derived from this framework are validated by empirical thresholds identified through analysis of a comprehensive global dataset (n = 3277). Notably, we find that the commonly assumed threshold of 45° in the ecoenzyme vector model overestimates microbial P limitation and underestimates microbial N limitation. By contrast, a vector length of 0.61 (unitless) and an angle of 55° in the vector model are more reliable thresholds identifying microbial C and N/P limitations, respectively. This framework, with a fundamental understanding of microbially-driven stoichiometric convergence in plant-soil-microbe systems, offers a practical and general avenue for identifying microbial nutrient limitations in soils. -
-
REFERENCES
[1] Elser, J.J., Fagan, W.F., Denno, R.F., et al. (2000). Nutritional constraints in terrestrial and freshwater food webs. Nature 408(6812): 578−580. DOI: 10.1038/35046058. [2] Sterner, R.W., and Elser, J.J. (2002). Ecological stoichiometry: the biology of elements from molecules to the biosphere. Princeton university press. [3] Sinsabaugh, R.L., and Follstad Shah, J.J. (2012). Ecoenzymatic Stoichiometry and Ecological Theory. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. S. 43: 313−343. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-071112-124414. [4] Cui, Y., Bing, H., Moorhead, D.L., et al. (2022a). Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry reveals widespread soil phosphorus limitation to microbial metabolism across Chinese forests. Commun. Earth Environ. 3(1): 184. DOI: 10.1038/s43247-022-00523-5. [5] Cui, Y., Moorhead, D.L., Wang, X., et al. (2022b). Decreasing microbial phosphorus limitation increases soil carbon release. Geoderma 419: 115868. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2022.115868. [6] Du, E., Terrer, C., Pellegrini, A.F., et al. (2020). Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation. Nat. Geosci. 13(3): 221−226. DOI: 10.1038/s41561-019-0530-4. [7] Sinsabaugh, R.L., Hill, B.H., and Follstad Shah, J.J. (2009). Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial organic nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment. Nature 462(7274): 795−798. DOI: 10.1038/nature08632. [8] Sinsabaugh, R.L., Moorhead, D.L., Xu, X., et al. (2017). Plant, microbial and ecosystem carbon use efficiencies interact to stabilize microbial growth as a fraction of gross primary production. New Phytol. 214(4): 1518−1526. DOI: 10.1111/nph.14485. [9] Čapek, P., Manzoni, S., Kaštovská, E., et al. (2018). A plant–microbe interaction framework explaining nutrient effects on primary production. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2(10): 1588−1596. DOI: 10.1038/s41559-018-0662-8. [10] Moorhead, D.L., Cui, Y., Sinsabaugh, R.L., et al. (2023). Interpreting patterns of ecoenzymatic stoichiometry. Soil Biol. Biochem. 180: 108997. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.108997. [11] Camenzind, T., Hättenschwiler, S., Treseder, K.K., et al. (2018). Nutrient limitation of soil microbial processes in tropical forests. Ecol. Monogr. 88(1): 4−21. DOI: 10.1002/ecm.1279. [12] Soong, J.L., Fuchslueger, L., Marañon-Jimenez, S., et al. (2020). Microbial carbon limitation: the need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling. Global Change Biol. 26(4): 1953−1961. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14962. [13] Cui, Y., Moorhead, D.L., Guo, X., et al. (2021). Stoichiometric models of microbial metabolic limitation in soil systems. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 30(11): 2297−2311. DOI: 10.1111/geb.13378. [14] Cui, Y., Peng, S., Delgado-Baquerizo, M., et al. (2023). Microbial communities in terrestrial surface soils are not widely limited by carbon. Global Change Biol. 29(15): 4412−4429. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16765. [15] Zhang, D., Wang, L., Qin, S., et al. (2023). Microbial nitrogen and phosphorus co-limitation across permafrost region. Global Change Biol. 29(14): 3910−3923. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16743. [16] Moorhead, D.L., Sinsabaugh, R.L., Hill, B.H., et al. (2016). Vector analysis of ecoenzyme activities reveal constraints on coupled C, N and P dynamics. Soil Biol. Biochem. 93: 1−7. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.10.019. [17] Rosinger, C., Rousk, J., and Sandén, H. (2019). Can enzymatic stoichiometry be used to determine growth-limiting nutrients for microorganisms. A critical assessment in two subtropical soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 128: 115−126. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.10.011. [18] Zheng, H., Vesterdal, L., Schmidt, I.K., et al. (2022). Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry can reflect microbial resource limitation, substrate quality, or both in forest soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 167: 108613. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108613. [19] Ochoa-Hueso, R., Borer, E.T., Seabloom, E.W., et al. (2020). Microbial processing of plant remains is co-limited by multiple nutrients in global grasslands. Global Change Biol. 26(8): 4572−4582. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.15146. [20] Spohn, M., and Kuzyakov, Y. (2013). Phosphorus mineralization can be driven by microbial need for carbon. Soil Biol. Biochem. 61: 69−75. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.02.013. [21] Feng, J., and Zhu, B. (2021). Global patterns and associated drivers of priming effect in response to nutrient addition. Soil Biol. Biochem. 153: 108118. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.108118. [22] Schimel, J.P., and Weintraub, M.N. (2003). The implications of exoenzyme activity on microbial carbon and nitrogen limitation in soil: a theoretical model. Soil Biol. Biochem. 35(4): 549−563. DOI: 10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00015-4. [23] Allison, S.D., and Vitousek, P.M. (2005). Responses of extracellular enzymes to simple and complex nutrient inputs. Soil Biol. Biochem. 37(5): 937−944. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.09.014. [24] Moorhead, D.L., Rinkes, Z.L., Sinsabaugh, R.L., et al. (2013). Dynamic relationships between microbial biomass, respiration, inorganic nutrients and enzyme activities: informing enzyme-based decomposition models. Front. Microbiol. 4: 223. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00223. [25] Sinsabaugh, R.L., Lauber, C.L., Weintraub, M.N., et al. (2008). Stoichiometry of soil enzyme activity at global scale. Ecol. Lett. 11(11): 1252−1264. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01245.x. [26] Geyer, K.M., Dijkstra, P., Sinsabaugh, R.L., et al. (2019). Clarifying the interpretation of carbon use efficiency in soil through methods comparison. Soil Biol. Biochem. 128: 79−88. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.09.036. [27] Mori, T. (2020). Does ecoenzymatic stoichiometry really determine microbial nutrient limitations. Soil Biol. Biochem. 146: 107816. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107816. [28] Cleveland, C.C., and Liptzin, D. (2007). C:N:P stoichiometry in soil: is there a “Redfield ratio” for the microbial biomass. Biogeochemistry 85: 235−252. DOI: 10.1007/s10533-007-9132-0. [29] Allen, A.P., and Gillooly, J.F. (2009). Towards an integration of ecological stoichiometry and the metabolic theory of ecology to better understand nutrient cycling. Ecol. Lett. 12(5): 369−384. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01302.x. [30] Sinsabaugh, R.L., Turner, B.L., Talbot, J.M., et al. (2016). Stoichiometry of microbial carbon use efficiency in soils. Ecol. Monogr. 86: 172−189. DOI: 10.1890/15-2110.1. [31] Sinsabaugh, R.L., Manzoni, S., Moorhead, D.L., et al. (2013). Carbon use efficiency of microbial communities: stoichiometry, methodology and modelling. Ecol. Lett. 16(7): 930−939. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12113. [32] Mooshammer, M., Wanek, W., Hämmerle, I., et al. (2014). Adjustment of microbial nitrogen use efficiency to carbon: nitrogen imbalances regulates soil nitrogen cycling. Nat. Commun. 5(1): 1−7. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4694. [33] Rumpel, C., and Kögel-Knabner, I. (2011). Deep soil organic matter-a key but poorly understood component of terrestrial C cycle. Plant Soil 338: 143−158. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-010-0391-5. [34] Angst, G., Messinger, J., Greiner, M., et al. (2018). Soil organic carbon stocks in topsoil and subsoil controlled by parent material, carbon input in the rhizosphere, and microbial-derived compounds. Soil Biol. Biochem. 122: 19−30. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.026. [35] Jing, X., Chen, X., Fang, J.Y., et al. (2020). Soil microbial carbon and nutrient constraints are driven more by climate and soil physicochemical properties than by nutrient addition in forest ecosystems. Soil Biol. Biochem. 141: 107657. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2019.107657. [36] Schimel, J.P., Weintraub, M.N., and Moorhead, D.L. (2022). Estimating microbial carbon use efficiency in soil: Isotope-based and enzyme-based methods measure fundamentally different aspects of microbial resource use. Soil Biol. Biochem. 169: 108677. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108677. [37] Chen, J., and Sinsabaugh, R.L. (2021). Linking microbial functional gene abundance and soil extracellular enzyme activity: Implications for soil carbon dynamics. Global Change Biol. 27(7): 1322−1325. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.15506. -
ABOUT THIS ARTICLE
Cite this article:
Cui Y., Moorhead D. L., Peng S., et al., (2024). Predicting microbial nutrient limitations from a stoichiometry-based threshold framework. The Innovation Geoscience 2(1): 100048. https://doi.org/10.59717/j.xinn-geo.2024.100048
Welcome!
To request copyright permission to republish or share portions of our works, please visit Copyright Clearance Center's (CCC) Marketplace website at marketplace.copyright.com.
Figures(3)
Article Metrics
Relative Articles
Cited by
Export File
Citation
Cui Y., Moorhead D. L., Peng S., et al., (2024). Predicting microbial nutrient limitations from a stoichiometry-based threshold framework. The Innovation Geoscience 2(1): 100048. https://doi.org/10.59717/j.xinn-geo.2024.100048
Format
Content
-
Figure 1.
Operational framework predicting microbial nutrient limitations from supply-and-demand stoichiometry
-
Figure 2.
Global distribution of sample sites (n = 3277)
-
Figure 3.
Theoretical and empirical thresholds of the microbial C and N/P limitations using the ecoenzyme vector model on a global dataset of soil ecoenzymatic activities (n = 3277)
