Ecological Archives E095-197-A1
M. Luke McCormack, Thomas S. Adams, Erica A. H. Smithwick, David M. Eissenstat. 2014. Variability in root production, phenology, and turnover rate among 12 temperate tree species. Ecology 95:2224–2235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/13-1942.1
Appendix A. Background data and additional results for the heuristic model and observations of root dynamics in the Rock Springs Common Garden.
Table A1. Different lifespan-production scenarios used in heuristic model and resulting standing crop for each scenario. Numbers listed under each month represent the number of roots born (production) or present (standing crop) under each lifespan-production scenario. Monthly standing crop is calculated as the new root production of that month plus the standing crop of the previous month minus the roots determined to die in that month.
|
Lifespan |
|
Jan |
Feb |
March |
April |
May |
June |
July |
Aug |
Sept |
Oct |
Nov |
Dec |
|
Concentrated |
|
Production |
0 |
0 |
2 |
10 |
15 |
30 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
1 |
0 |
|
91 |
Standing Crop |
1 |
0 |
2 |
12 |
27 |
55 |
65 |
60 |
37 |
22 |
13 |
6 |
||
182 |
Standing Crop |
23 |
13 |
8 |
13 |
27 |
57 |
77 |
87 |
92 |
87 |
73 |
43 |
||
365 |
Standing Crop |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
||
1215 |
Standing Crop |
306 |
301 |
302 |
312 |
327 |
357 |
375 |
375 |
367 |
342 |
323 |
313 |
||
3650 |
Standing Crop |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
||
Distributed |
|
Production |
8 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
|
91 |
Standing Crop |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
||
182 |
Standing Crop |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
50 |
||
365 |
Standing Crop |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
||
1215 |
Standing Crop |
333 |
334 |
333 |
333 |
334 |
333 |
333 |
334 |
333 |
333 |
334 |
333 |
||
3650 |
Standing Crop |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
||
Bi-modal, spring dominant |
|
Production |
1 |
1 |
5 |
10 |
15 |
23 |
15 |
8 |
14 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
|
91 |
Standing Crop |
4 |
3 |
7 |
16 |
30 |
48 |
53 |
46 |
37 |
27 |
21 |
8 |
||
182 |
Standing Crop |
34 |
25 |
15 |
20 |
33 |
52 |
66 |
75 |
85 |
80 |
67 |
48 |
||
365 |
Standing Crop |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
||
1215 |
Standing Crop |
309 |
305 |
308 |
317 |
331 |
350 |
360 |
360 |
360 |
345 |
332 |
323 |
||
3650 |
Standing Crop |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
||
Bi-modal, equal peaks |
|
Production |
0 |
0 |
2 |
10 |
22 |
15 |
10 |
22 |
10 |
7 |
2 |
0 |
|
91 |
Standing Crop |
2 |
(1) |
2 |
12 |
34 |
47 |
47 |
47 |
42 |
39 |
19 |
9 |
||
182 |
Standing Crop |
41 |
19 |
11 |
14 |
34 |
49 |
59 |
81 |
89 |
86 |
66 |
51 |
||
365 |
Standing Crop |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
||
1215 |
Standing Crop |
309 |
302 |
302 |
312 |
334 |
349 |
357 |
369 |
357 |
349 |
341 |
319 |
||
3650 |
Standing Crop |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Table A2. Coefficient of Variation (CV) for ƬAvg,ƬMax, ƬMin, and total number of roots produced across years 2008, 2009, and 2010 (N = 3).
|
Coefficient of Variation |
|||
Species |
ƬAvg |
ƬMax |
ƬMin |
Total Root Production |
Acer negundo |
31.3 |
23.8 |
56.4 |
51.5 |
Acer rubrum |
28.9 |
16.6 |
90.0 |
54.3 |
Acer saccharum |
23.3 |
16.6 |
41.2 |
14.2 |
Carya glabra |
42.3 |
13.3 |
76.0 |
16.4 |
Juglans nigra |
42.0 |
26.4 |
82.2 |
55.0 |
Liriodendron tulipifera |
28.0 |
25.5 |
46.4 |
29.1 |
Pinus strobus |
5.3 |
5.7 |
5.9 |
31.1 |
Pinus virginiana |
29.1 |
26 |
45.9 |
61.5 |
Populus tremuloides |
10.4 |
14.3 |
45.3 |
47.5 |
Quercus alba |
36.7 |
36.2 |
43.9 |
35.5 |
Quercus rubra |
35.7 |
17.7 |
103.3 |
56.8 |
Sassafras albidum |
27.8 |
19.9 |
94.1 |
52.4 |
Fig. A1. Weekly precipitation measured at a weather station near the Rock Spring Common Garden in central Pennsylvania, USA for years 2008, 2009, and 2010 (USDA NRCS, Site 2036 "Rock Springs", http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/nwcc/site?sitenum=2036&state=pa).
Fig. A2. ƬMax, ƬAvg, and ƬMin (+SE) for 12 temperate tree species. Left y-axis indicates turnover rates for ƬMax and ƬAvg; right y-axis is for ƬMin. Significant differences in turnover rates between species according to Tukey HSD test indicated where species do not have the same letter (n = 3). Differences in ƬMin were not significant.
Fig. A3. Least-squares regression (N = 12) between median fine root lifespan and root turnover rate (a) ƬMax (P = 0.0002), (b) ƬAvg (P = 0.0005), and (c) ƬMin (P = 0.02). Each point represents the mean turnover estimate (+SE, N = 3). Removal of the single point with the highest turnover rate and shortest lifespan (Populus tremuloides) reduces the strength of the relationship between lifespan and ƬMax and ƬAvg (P < 0.05, R² = 0.48 and 0.41 respectively) and cause the relationship to be nonsignificant for ƬMin.