Reveals phosphorus limitation impacts soil stability and microbial dynamics in eucalyptus plantations, suggesting management strategies are essential.
Intensively managed Eucalyptus plantations are critical timber supply, yet their long-term sustainability is threatened by declining productivity linked to phosphorus (P) limitation. This study aimed to reveal and quantify the mechanisms underlying this process using a chronosequence of first- to third-generation plantations in subtropical China, integrating analyses of soil aggregate stability, sequential P fractionation, active Al/Fe oxides, and microbial functional guild dynamics. We found that successive planting was associated with degradation of aggregate stability and severe soil acidification. This physicochemical deterioration coincided with shifts in P-cycling-related microbial indicators, including declines in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and acid phosphatase activity. Concurrently, P speciation shifted systematically, with the contribution of bioavailable P pools decreasing by up to 20.6% while recalcitrant pools increased by 17.84%. Path analysis revealed that escalating chemical stress (soil acidification and Al/Fe activation) showed the strongest negative association with P availability (path coefficient β = −0.465), while aggregate stability showed the strongest positive association (β = 0.384). Generation-specific models indicated that the P transformation network shifted from a complex, multi-pathway configuration in the first generation to a constrained system with fewer supportive linkages by the third generation. We conclude that the decline in P availability is associated with coupled physical, chemical, and biological changes, wherein physicochemical deterioration coincides with reduced biological P-mobilizing capacity. These findings provide a process-based framework for diagnosing soil degradation and developing integrated management strategies for intensively managed plantations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: