Search

Revealing the ecological consequences of bark multifunctionality and its underlying traits has become a relatively new but essential focus in plant ecology. Although the enormous differences between the most crucial bark layers, that is, inner and outer bark, in structure and functions have been widely recognized, the overall bark has been regarded as a homogenous tissue in most bark-related studies. This has led to poor knowledge on the functional independence, specialized contributions and possible linkages of inner and outer bark traits across tree species when further evaluating the crucial ecosystem functions that bark provides, especially in driving variation in bark decomposition. To fill this research gap, we used a ‘common garden experiment’ on deadwood of six gymnosperms in a temperate forest in the Netherlands over 4 years of decomposition. We evaluated the differences and associations between the inner and outer bark in initial functional traits, decomposition rates and afterlife effects of traits in driving in situ bark decomposition across tree species at the earlier decomposition stage. We report four main findings: (1) inner and outer bark traits varied significantly and were not coordinated across tree species; (2) correspondingly, the decomposition of the inner and outer bark were asynchronous and not coordinated across species and inner bark generally decomposed faster than outer bark; (3) the strong predictive traits driving bark decomposability were bark layer-specific, with several inner bark traits controlling inner bark decomposition rates but outer bark decomposability being poorly predicted by outer bark traits and (4) besides being controlled by inner bark traits, inner bark decomposition was also indirectly regulated by several functional traits and the structure-related trait spectrum of outer bark. Synthesis. This is the first study that has linked functional traits, decomposability and afterlife effects of the inner and outer bark within the bark quantitatively. We highlight the significance of separating functional traits and ecological consequences of the inner and outer bark in research in bark ecology and deadwood dynamics, rather than erroneously considering bark as a homogeneous tissue. Such research will help to better evaluate the function-oriented contribution of bark to the turnover of forest carbon and biogeochemical cycles from local to global scale.

The importance of wood decay for global carbon and nutrient cycles is widely recognized. However, relatively little is known about bark decay dynamics, even though bark represents up to 25% of stem dry mass. Moreover, bark presence versus absence can significantly alter wood decay rates. Therefore, it really matters for the fate of carbon whether variation in bark and wood decay rates is coordinated across tree species. Answering this question requires advances in methodology to measure both bark and wood mass loss accurately. Decay rates of large logs in the field are often quantified as loss in tissue density, in which case volume depletions of bark and wood can yield large underestimations. To quantify the real decay rates, we assessed bark mass loss per stem surface area and wood mass loss based on volume-corrected density loss. We further defined the range of actual bark mass loss by considering bark cover loss. Then, we tested the correlation between bark and wood mass loss across 20 temperate tree species during 4 years of decomposition. The area-based method generally showed more than 3-fold higher bark mass loss than the density-based method (even higher if considering bark cover loss), and volume-corrected wood mass losses were 1.08–1.12 times higher than density-based mass loss. The deviation of bark mass loss between the two methods was higher for tree species with thicker inner bark. Bark generally decomposed twice as fast as wood across species, and faster decaying bark came with faster decaying wood (R2 = 0.26, p = 0.006). We strongly suggest using corrected volume when assessing wood mass loss especially for the species with faster decomposable sapwood and all the wood at advanced decay stages. Further studies of coarse stem decomposition should consider trait ‘afterlife’ effects of inner bark and estimate fraction of stem bark cover to obtain more accurate decay rates. Our new method should benefit our understanding of the in situ dynamics of woody debris decay and monitoring research in different forest ecosystems world-wide, and should aid meta-analyses across diverse studies.