Ecology

1.
Huwyler, F., Kappeli, J., Serafimova, K., Swanson, E. & Tobin, J. Conservation Finance: Moving Beyond Donor Funding Toward an Investor-driven Approach (WWF, Credit Suisse and McKinsey & Company, 2014); http://go.nature.com/2Ka5Y2u
2.
Deutz, A. et al. Financing Nature: Closing the Global Biodiversity Financing Gap: Full Report (Paulson Institute, Nature Conservancy and Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, 2020).

3.
Halpern, B. et al. Gaps and mismatches between global conservation priorities and spending. Conserv. Biol. 20, 56–64 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
James, A., Gaston, K. J. & BalmfordA. Can we afford to conserve biodiversity? BioScience 51, 43–52 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
McCarthy, D. et al. Financial costs of meeting global biodiversity conservation targets: current spending and unmet needs. Science 338, 946–949 (2012).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Nature’s Dangerous Decline ‘Unprecedented’; Species Extinction Rates ‘Accelerating’ (IPBES, 2019); http://go.nature.com/2V4ZBN9

7.
The Global Risks Report 2020 (WEF, 2020); https://go.nature.com/3ahNfg8

8.
IUCN Views on the Preparation, Scope and Content of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (IUCN, 2018); https://go.nature.com/2WlW3ti

9.
Biodiversity: Finance and the Economic and Business Case for Action (OECD, 2019); https://go.nature.com/3h0F9Kc

10.
Parker, C. & Cranford, M. The Little Biodiversity Finance Book. A Guide to Proactive Investment in Natural Capital (Global Canopy Program, 2010); https://go.nature.com/3mwyxUJ

11.
Coad, L. et al. Widespread shortfalls in protected area resourcing undermine efforts to conserve biodiversity. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17, 259–264 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Kearney, S. G. et al. Estimating the benefit of well-managed protected areas for threatened species conservation. ORYX 54, 276–284 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Waldron, A. et al. Protecting 30% of the Planet for Nature: Costs, Benefits and Economic Implications (IIASA, 2020); https://go.nature.com/387GkDq

14.
Stepping, K. M. K. & Meijer, K. S. The challenges of assessing the effectiveness of biodiversity-related development aid. Trop. Conserv. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082918770995 (2018).

15.
Waldron, A. et al. Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12144–12148 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Gallo-Cajiao, E. et al. Crowdfunding biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 32, 1426–1435 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Parker, C., Cranford, M., Oakes, N. & Leggett, M. The Little Biodiversity Finance Book 3rd edn (Global Canopy Programme, 2012).

18.
Arlaud, M. et al. in Towards a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Principles, Challenges and Perspectives (eds Filho, W. L. et al.) Ch. 5 (Springer, 2018); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73028-8_5

19.
Rawat, U. S. & Agarwal, N. K. Biodiversity: concept, threats and conservation. Environ. Conserv. J. 16, 19–28 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Gorobets, A. Wild fauna conservation: IUCN-CITES match is required. Ecol. Indic. 112, 106091 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Rodrigues, A. S. L. et al. The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 71–76 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Rao, M., Naro-Maciel, E. & Sterling, E. Protected Areas and Biodiversity Conservation II: Management and Effectiveness (Network of Conservation Educators and Practitioners, 2009).

23.
Adams, V. M., Iacona, G. D. & Possingham, H. P. Weighing the benefits of expanding protected areas versus managing existing ones. Nat. Sustain. 2, 404–411 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

24.
BIOFIN The Biodiversity Finance Initiative Workbook 2018 (United Nations Development Programme, 2018).

25.
Costanza, R. et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260 (1997).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Costanza, R. et al. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob. Environ. Change 26, 152–158 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Naidoo, R. et al. Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 9495–9500 (2008).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Turner, W. et al. Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience 57, 868–873 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Balmford, A. et al. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297, 950–953 (2002).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Hily, E. et al. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of a biodiversity conservation policy: a bio-econometric analysis of Natura 2000 contracts in forests. Ecol. Econ. 119, 197-208 (2015).

31.
Ferraro, P. J., McIntosh, C. & Ospina, M. The effectiveness of the US endangered special act: an econometric analysis using matching methods. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 54, 245–261 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Waldron, A. et al. Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12144–12148 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Waldron, A. et al. Reductions in global biodiversity loss predicted from conservation spending. Nature 551, 364–367 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Richerzhagen, C. et al. Why We Need More and Better Biodiversity Aid Briefing Paper 13 (German Development Institute, 2016); https://go.nature.com/2K0S9Dz

35.
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Da Fonseca, G. A. & Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853–858 (2000).

36.
Karousakis, K. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Policy Instruments for Biodiversity: Impact Evaluation, Cost-effectiveness Analysis and Other Approaches Environment Working Paper No.141 (OECD, 2018).

37.
Isaza, C., Bofill, W. & Cabrera, H. Cost-effective species conservation: an application to Huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus) in Chile. Environ. Dev. Econ. 12, 535–551 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Alix-Garcia, J. M., Shapiro, E. N. & Sims, K. R. Forest conservation and slippage: evidence from Mexico’s national payments for ecosystem services program. Land Econ. 88, 613–638 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Bare, M. Assessing the impact of international conservation aid on deforestation in sub-Saharan Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 125010 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Ferraro, P. J. et al. More strictly protected areas are not necessarily more protective: evidence from Bolivia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 025011 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Lindsey, P. A. et al. More than $1 billion needed annually to secure Africa’s protected areas with lions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E10788–E10796 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Bonham, C. et al. Conservation trust funds, protected area management effectiveness and conservation outcomes: lessons from the global conservation fund. Parks 20, 89–100 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Hein, Lars et al. Progress in natural capital accounting for ecosystems. Science 367, 514–515 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Natural Capital Accounting and Valuing Ecosystem Services Project (UN, 2019); http://go.nature.com/2K2jsxn

45.
Ecosystem Valuation and Natural Capital Accounting (Gaborone Declaration for Sustainability in Africa, 2012); http://www.gaboronedeclaration.com/nca

46.
Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review (CPEIR) (UNDP, 2015); https://go.nature.com/2K0C7tp

47.
BIOFIN Workbook: Mobilising Resources for Biodiversity and Sustainable Development (UND, 2016); https://go.nature.com/3p1PDMb

48.
Shieh, G. Effect size, statistical power, and sample size for assessing interactions between categorical and continuous variables. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 72, 136–154 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Leon, A. C. & Heo, M. Sample sizes required to detect interactions between two binary fixed-effects in a mixed-effects linear regression model. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 53, 603–608 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Marques, A. et al. Increasing impacts of land use on biodiversity and carbon sequestration driven by population and economic growth. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 628–637 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Tilman, D. et al. Future threats to biodiversity and pathways to their prevention. Nature 546, 73–81 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Luther, D. A. et al. Determinants of bird conservation—action implementation and associated population trends of threatened species. Conserv. Biol. 30, 1338–1346 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Hoffmann, M. et al. The impact of conservation on the status of the world’s vertebrates. Science 330, 1503–1509 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Brooks, T. M. et al. Analysing biodiversity and conservation knowledge products to support regional environmental assessments. Sci. Data 3, I60007 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Keith, D. A. et al. Scientific foundations for an IUCN Red List of ecosystems. PLoS ONE 8, e62111 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. & Mastruzzi, M. The worldwide governance indicators: methodology and analytical issues. Hague J. Rule Law 3, 220–246 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Akaike, H. Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle (Academiai Kiado, 1973).

58.
Bozdogan, H. Model selection and Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC): the general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika 52, 345–370 (1987).
Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Angrist, J. D. & Pischke, J.-S. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion (Princeton Univ. Press, 2009); http://go.nature.com/3r5t6zA

60.
Wooldridge, J. M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data 2nd edn (MIT Press, 2010). More

1.
Galloway, J. N. et al. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 320, 889–892 (2008).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Zhou, X., Zhang, Y. & Downing, A. Non-linear response of microbial activity across a gradient of nitrogen addition to a soil from the gurbantunggut desert, northwestern China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 47, 67–77 (2012).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Liu, X. et al. Enhanced nitrogen deposition over China. Nature 494, 459–462 (2013).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Fang, Y. T., Gundersen, P., Mo, J. M. & Zhu, W. X. Input and output of dissolved organic and inorganic nitrogen in subtropical forests of south China under high air pollution. Biogeosciences 5, 339–352 (2008).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Hoorens, B., Aerts, R. & Stroetenga, M. Does initial litter chemistry explain litter mixture effects on decomposition?. Oecologia 137, 578–586 (2003).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Passarinho, J. A. P., Lamosa, P., Baeta, J. P., Santos, H. & Ricardo, C. P. P. Annual changes in the concentration of minerals and organic compounds of Quercus suber leaves. Physiol. Plantarum 127, 100–110 (2006).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Shen, F. F. et al. Litterfall ecological stoichiometry and soil available nutrients under long-term nitrogen deposition in a Chinese fir plantation. Acta Ecol. Sin. 38, 7477–7487 (2018).
Google Scholar 

8.
Huangfu, C. & Wei, Z. Nitrogen addition drives convergence of leaf litter decomposition rates between Flaveria bidentis and native plant. Plant Ecol. 219, 1355–1368 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Vivanco, L. & Austin, A. Nitrogen addition stimulates forest litter decomposition and disrupts species interactions in Patagonia, Argentina. Global Change Biol. 17, 1963–1974 (2011).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Li, H., Wei, Z., Huangfu, C., Chen, X. & Yang, D. Litter mixture dominated by leaf litter of the invasive species, Flaveria bidentis, accelerates decomposition and favors nitrogen release. J. Plant Res. 130, 167–180 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Aerts, R. D. C. H. Nutritional and plant-mediated controls on leaf litter decomposition of Carex species. Ecology 78, 244–260 (1997).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Osono, T. & Takeda, H. Accumulation and release of nitrogen and phosphorus in relation to lignin decomposition in leaf litter of 14 tree species. Ecol. Res. 19, 593–602 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Bradford, M. A., Berg, B., Maynard, D. S., Wieder, W. R. & Wood, S. A. Understanding the dominant controls on litter decomposition. J. Ecol. 104, 229–238 (2016).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
García-Palacios, P., Shaw, E. A., Wall, D. H. & Hättenschwiler, S. Temporal dynamics of biotic and abiotic drivers of litter decomposition. Ecol. Lett. 19, 554–563 (2016).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Song, C., Liu, D., Yang, G., Song, Y. & Mao, R. Effect of nitrogen addition on decomposition of Calamagrostis angustifolia litters from freshwater marshes of northeast China. Ecol. Eng. 37, 1578–1582 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Zhang, D., Hui, D., Luo, Y. & Zhou, G. Rates of litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: global patterns and controlling factors. J. Plant Ecol. 1, 85–93 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Chen, F. et al. Nitrogen deposition effect on forest litter decomposition is interactively regulated by endogenous litter quality and exogenous resource supply. Plant Soil. 437, 413 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Wang, Q., Kwak, J., Choi, W. & Chang, S. X. Long-term N and S addition and changed litter chemistry do not affect trembling aspen leaf litter decomposition, elemental composition and enzyme activity in a boreal forest. Environ. Pollut. 250, 143–154 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Hou, S. et al. Increasing rates of long-term nitrogen deposition consistently increased litter decomposition in a semi-arid grassland. New Phytol. 229, 296–307 (2020).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Yu, Z. et al. Nitrogen addition enhances home-field advantage during litter decomposition in subtropical forest plantations. Soil Biol. Biochem. 90, 188–196 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Pichon, N. et al. Decomposition disentangled: A test of the multiple mechanisms by which nitrogen enrichment alters litter decomposition. Funct. Ecol. 34, 1485–1496 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Hobbie, S. et al. Response of decomposing litter and its microbial community to multiple forms of nitrogen enrichment. Ecol. Monogr. 82, 389–405 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Knops, J., Naeem, S. & Reich, P. The impact of elevated CO2, increased nitrogen availability and biodiversity on plant tissue quality and decomposition. Global Change Biol. 13, 1960–1971 (2007).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Prescott, C. E. Does nitrogen availability control rates of litter decomposition in forests?. Plant Soil. 168, 83–88 (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Zhou, Y., Wang, L., Chen, Y., Zhang, J. & Liu, Y. Litter stoichiometric traits have stronger impact on humification than environment conditions in an alpine treeline ecotone. Plant Soil 453, 545–560 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Mooshammer, M. et al. Stoichiometric controls of nitrogen and phosphorus cycling in decomposing beech litter. Ecology 93, 770–782 (2012).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Remy, E. et al. Driving factors behind litter decomposition and nutrient release at temperate forest edges. Ecosystems 24, 755–771 (2017).
Google Scholar 

28.
Zhou, S. et al. Simulated nitrogen deposition significantly suppresses the decomposition of forest litter in a natural evergreen broad-leaved forest in the rainy area of western China. Plant Soil 420, 135–145 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Cornwell, W. et al. Plant species traits are the predominant control on litter decomposition rates within biomes worldwide. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1065–1071 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Norris, M., Avis, P., Reich, P. & Hobbie, S. E. Positive feedbacks between decomposition and soil nitrogen availability along fertility gradients. Plant Soil 367, 347–361 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Berg, B. & McClaugherty, C. Plant Litter: Decomposition, Humus Formation, Carbon Sequestration 2nd edn. (Springer, Berlin, 2008).
Google Scholar 

32.
Cuchietti, A., Marcotti, E., Gurvich, D. E., Cingolani, A. M. & Harguindeguy, N. P. Leaf litter mixtures and neighbour effects: Low-nitrogen and high-lignin species increase decomposition rate of high-nitrogen and low-lignin neighbours. Appl. Soil Ecol. 82, 44–51 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Jing, H. & Wang, G. Temporal dynamics of Pinus tabulaeformis litter decomposition under nitrogen addition on the loess plateau of China. For. Ecol. Manag. 476, 118465 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Sun, T., Dong, L., Wang, Z., Lü, X. & Mao, Z. Effects of long-term nitrogen deposition on fine root decomposition and its extracellular enzyme activities in temperate forests. Soil Biol. Biochem. 93, 50–59 (2016).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Carrera, A. L. & Bertiller, M. B. Combined effects of leaf litter and soil microsite on decomposition process in arid rangelands. J. Environ. Manag. 114, 505–511 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Sun, Z. et al. The effect of nitrogen addition on soil respiration from a nitrogen-limited forest soil. Agr. For. Meteorol. 197, 103–110 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

37.
He, X., Lin, Y., Han, G. & Ma, T. Litterfall interception by understorey vegetation delayed litter decomposition in Cinnamomum camphora plantation forest. Plant Soil 372, 207–219 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Wang, Q. et al. Impact of 36 years of nitrogen fertilization on microbial community composition and soil carbon cycling-related enzyme activities in rhizospheres and bulk soils in northeast China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 136, 148–157 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Chen, J. et al. Co-stimulation of soil glycosidase activity and soil respiration by nitrogen addition. Global Change Biol. 23, 1328–1337 (2016).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Wang, C. et al. Responses of soil microbial community to continuous experimental nitrogen additions for 13 years in a nitrogen-rich tropical forest. Soil Biol. Biochem. 121, 103–112 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Jing, X. et al. Neutral effect of nitrogen addition and negative effect of phosphorus addition on topsoil extracellular enzymatic activities in an alpine grassland ecosystem. Appl. Soil Ecol. 107, 205–213 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Jing, X. et al. Nitrogen deposition has minor effect on soil extracellular enzyme activities in six Chinese forests. Sci. Total Environ. 607–608, 806–815 (2017).
ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

43.
Wang, Q., Kwak, J., Choi, W. & Chang, S. X. Decomposition of trembling aspen leaf litter under long-term nitrogen and sulfur deposition: effects of litter chemistry and forest floor microbial properties. For. Ecol. Manag. 412, 53–61 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Huang, X. et al. Autotoxicity hinders the natural regeneration of Cinnamomum migao H W. Li in southwest China. Forests 10, 919 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Feng, H., Xue, L. & Chen, H. Responses of decomposition of green leaves and leaf litter to stand density, N and P additions in Acacia auriculaeformis stands. Eur. J. For. Res. 137, 819–830 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Diepen, L. V. et al. Changes in litter quality caused by simulated nitrogen deposition reinforce the N-induced suppression of litter decay. Ecosphere 6, t205 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Zechmeister-Boltenstern, S. et al. The application of ecological stoichiometry to plant–microbial–soil organic matter transformations. Ecol. Monogr. 85, 133–155 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Hobbie, S. E. Nitrogen effects on decomposition: A five-year experiment in eight temperate sites. Ecology 89, 2633–2644 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Hobbie, S. Interactions between litter lignin and nitrogenitter lignin and soil nitrogen availability during leaf litter decomposition in a hawaiian montane forest. Ecosystems 3, 484–494 (2000).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Zhang, J. et al. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus addition on litter decomposition and nutrients release in a tropical forest. Plant Soil 454, 139–153 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Apolinário, V. et al. Litter decomposition of signalgrass grazed with different stocking rates and nitrogen fertilizer levels. Agron. J. 106, 1–6 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Takeda, H. Decomposition Processes of Litter Along a Latitudinal Gradient (Springer, Dordrecht, 1998).
Google Scholar 

53.
Torreta, N. K. & Takeda, H. Carbon and nitrogen dynamics of decomposing leaf litter in a tropical hill evergreen forest. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 35, 57–63 (1999).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Song, Y., Song, C., Ren, J., Zhang, X. & Jiang, L. Nitrogen input increases Deyeuxia angustifolia litter decomposition and enzyme activities in a marshland ecosystem in Sanjiang plain, northeast China. Wetlands. 39, 549–557 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Sinsabaugh, R. L., Hill, B. H. & Follstad Shah, J. J. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry of microbial organic nutrient acquisition in soil and sediment. Nature 462, 795–798 (2009).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Xia, M. A. T. A. Long-term simulated atmospheric nitrogen deposition alters leaf and fine root decomposition. Ecosystems 21, 1–14 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Chen, F., Feng, X. & Liang, C. Endogenous versus exogenous nutrient affects C, N, and P dynamics in decomposing litters in mid-subtropical forests of China. Ecol. Res. 27, 923–932 (2012).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Zhou, Z., Wang, C., Zheng, M., Jiang, L. & Luo, Y. Patterns and mechanisms of responses by soil microbial communities to nitrogen addition. Soil Biol. Biochem. 115, 433–441 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
He, X. et al. Diversity and decomposition potential of endophytes in leaves of a Cinnamomum camphora plantation in China. Ecol. Res. 27, 273 (2011).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Berg, B. R. & Laskowski, R. Litter Decomposition: A Guide to Carbon and Nutrient Turnover, Advances in Ecological Research Vol. 38 (Academic Press, Waltham, 2006).
Google Scholar 

61.
Hall, S., Huang, W., Timokhin, V. & Hammel, K. Lignin lags, leads, or limits the decomposition of litter and soil organic carbon. Ecology 101, e03113 (2020).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Tu, L. et al. Nitrogen addition significantly affects forest litter decomposition under high levels of ambient nitrogen deposition. PLoS ONE 9, e88752 (2014).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

63.
Zhou, X. & Zhang, Y. Temporal dynamics of soil oxidative enzyme activity across a simulated gradient of nitrogen deposition in the gurbantunggut desert, northwestern China. Geoderma 213, 261–267 (2014).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Hao, C. et al. Effects of experimental nitrogen and phosphorus addition on litter decomposition in an old-growth tropical forest. PLoS ONE 8, e84101 (2013).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Cameron, K. C., Di, H. J. & Moir, J. Nitrogen losses from the soil/plant system: a review. Ann. Appl. Biol. 162, 145–173 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Waldrop, M. P., Zak, D. R., Sinsabaugh, R. L., Gallo, M. & Lauber, C. Nitrogen deposition modifies soil carbon storage through changes in microbial enzymatic activity. Ecol. Appl. 14, 1172–1177 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Freedman, Z. B., Upchurch, R. A., Zak, D. R. & Cline, L. C. Anthropogenic N deposition slows decay by favoring bacterial metabolism: Insights from metagenomic analyses. Front. Microbiol. 7, 259 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Marklein, A. R. & Houlton, B. Z. Nitrogen inputs accelerate phosphorus cycling rates across a wide variety of terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytol. 193, 696–704 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

69.
Weand, M. P., Arthur, M. A., Lovett, G. M., McCulley, R. L. & Weathers, K. C. Effects of tree species and N additions on forest floor microbial communities and extracellular enzyme activities. Soil Biol. Biochem. 42, 2161–2173 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Wang, C. et al. Response of litter decomposition and related soil enzyme activities to different forms of nitrogen fertilization in a subtropical forest. Ecol. Res. 26, 505–513 (2011).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Feng, H., Xue, L. & Chen, H. Responses of decomposition of green leaves and leaf litter to stand density, N and P additions in Acacia auriculaeformis stands. Eur. J. Forest Res. 137, 819 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Frey, S. D., Knorr, M., Parrent, J. L. & Simpson, R. T. Chronic nitrogen enrichment affects the structure and function of the soil microbial community in temperate hardwood and pine forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 196, 159–171 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Zheng, Z. et al. Effects of nutrient additions on litter decomposition regulated by phosphorus-induced changes in litter chemistry in a subtropical forest, China. For. Ecol. Manag. 400, 123–128 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Mo, J. et al. Nitrogen addition reduces soil respiration in a mature tropical forest in southern China. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 403–412 (2008).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

75.
Liu, G., Jiang, N. & Zhang, L. D. Soil Physical and Chemical Analysis and Description of Soil Profiles (Standards Press of China, Beijing, 1996).
Google Scholar 

76.
Bao, S. D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis 3rd edn. (China Agricultural Press, Beijing, 2013).
Google Scholar 

77.
Allen, S. E. Chemical analysis of Ecological Materials, 2nd edn, Vol. 13 (Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1989).
Google Scholar 

78.
Rowland, A. P. & Roberts, J. D. Lignin and cellulose fractionation in decomposition studies using acid-detergent fibre methods. Commun. Soil Sci. Plan. 25, 269–277 (1994).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Olson, J. Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology 44, 322–331 (1963).
Article  Google Scholar 

80.
Bockheim, J., Jepsen, E. A. & Heisey, D. M. Nutrient dynamics in decomposing leaf litter of four tree species on a sandy soil in northwestern Wisconsin. Can. J. For. Res. 21, 803–812 (1991).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar  More