David Coleman

University of Georgia Ecology Annex Athens Georgia 30602-2360 USA

(706)542-2309 Coleman@sparc.ecology.uga.edu http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu/piprofiles/pro_coleman.html Mark Hunter

University of Georgia Ecology Annex Athens Georgia 30602-2360 USA

(706)542-4819 Mhunter@sparc.ecology.uga.edu http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu/piprofiles/pro_hunter.html Cathy Pringle

University of Georgia Ecology Annex Athens Georgia 30602-2360 USA

(706)542-4289 Pringle@sparc.ecology.uga.edu http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu/piprofiles/pro_pringle.html Sina Adl

University of Georgia Ecology Annex Athens Georgia 30602-2360 USA

(706)542-2309 Adl@sparc.ecology.uga.edu http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu Comparison of decomposition and nutrient losses from three species of leaf litter in terrestrial and aquatic habitats at CWT and LUQ LTER sites. Overall hypothesis is that macro-consumers have different patterns and impacts on decomposition rates than microbial decomposers, and that these patterns are magnified in litters of low vs. high qualities over the two years of the experiment. Study_Dataset_Keywords: litter decomposition,chestnut oak,rhododendron maximum,tulip poplar Triplicate plots set out with three species of litter, confined in 1 mm mesh litter bags and a similar set fully accessible, held together with plastic binder clips. Each bag of bundle will be marked with pink plastic marker flags. Coweeta LTER litter decomoposition chestnut oak Rhododendron maximum tulip poplar Must adhere to the Coweeta LTER Data Policy (See http://coweeta.ecology.uga.edu/webdocs/3/static/datapolicies.html). http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu/summaries/summary1010.html lower part of WS 18, aquatic site TBA 2000-01-01 2000-12-01 Coweeta LTER Information Manager

Institute of Ecology University of Georgia Athens Georgia 30602 USA

(828)524-2128 Ted Gragson

Institute of Ecology University of Georgia Athens Georgia 30602 USA

tgragson@earthlink.net principalInvestigator James Vose

Institute of Ecology University of Georgia Athens Georgia 30602 USA

jvose@fs.fed.us principalInvestigator Brian Kloeppel

Institute of Ecology University of Georgia Athens Georgia 30602 USA

kloeppel@sparc.ecology.uga.edu principalInvestigator The Coweeta LTER Research Program has evolved since 1980 from a site-based to a site- and region-based project examining the effects of disturbance and environmental gradients on biogeochemical cycling, and the underlying watershed ecosystem processes that regulate and respond to those cycles. The objective for the 2002-2008 research is to advance scientific understanding of the spatial, temporal, and decision-making components of land use and land-use change in the southern Appalachian Mountains over the last 200 years, and forecast patterns into the future 30 years. This will be accomplished by addressing ecological and socioeconomic aspects of land-use change while continuing long-term studies of environmental gradients and natural disturbance regimes. The result will be a more complete understanding of ecological dynamics in the southern Appalachian Mountains that makes possible the development of reasonable forecasts of its future ecological state. | The guiding hypothesis for the proposed research is that the frequency, intensity, and extent of land use represents human decision-making in response to socioeconomic and bio-geophysical conditions with consequences that cascade through ecosystems. The research activities are organized into three initiatives: (1) Characterization of the Socio-Natural Template, (2) Ecosystem Responses to the Socio-Natural Template, and (3) Forecasting Ecosystem Responses to Changes in the Socio-Natural Template. The integrated scientific research will provide both a description as well as an explanation of the underlying causes of land use and the consequences of land-use change for southern Appalachian ecosystems and society. It thus recognizes the complexity of land use as a process and the research needs as defined in the LTER Program and the broader scientific community. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in the material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. uid=cwt,o=lter,dc=ecoinformatics,dc=org all public read 1010.csv 1010.csv 1 \n \n column , http://cwt33.ecology.uga.edu/data/1010.csv date date codes for the dates when the sample was collected 1 April 17 2000 2 July 17 2000 3 October 16 2000 4 January 24 2001 None Missing Value site site code for the type of site where sample was collected 1 riparian 2 upland None Missing Value mesh mesh type of mesh used in data collection 1 coarse 2 fine mesh None Missing Value species species species codes 1 Liriodendron tulipifera; 2 = Quercus prinus; 3 = Rhododendron maximum None Missing Value code code species codes LT Liriodendron tulipifera QP Quercus prinus None Missing Value rep rep replicate number ranging from 1 to 3 replicate number ranging from 1 to 3 None Missing Value weight weight weight of the samplel gram real None Missing Value Colembola Colembola number of colembola specimens in sample number of colembola specimens in sample None Missing Value Oribatids Oribatids number of oribatids specimens in sample number of oribatids specimens in sample None Missing Value Immatures Immatures number of inmatures specimens in sample number of inmatures specimens in sample None Missing Value Mesostigs Mesostigs number of mesostigs specimens in sample number of mesostigs specimens in sample None Missing Value Prostigs Prostigs number of prostigs specimens in sample number of prostigs specimens in sample None Missing Value CT CT relative concentrations condensed tannin dimensionless real None Missing Value HT HT relative concentrations hydrolysable tannin dimensionless real None Missing Value TP TP relative concentrations total phenolics dimensionless real None Missing Value N N percent of Nitrogen dimensionless real None Missing Value C C percent of Carbon dimensionless real None Missing Value CN CN Carbon/Nitrogen ratio dimensionless real None Missing Value LIG LIG percent of Lignin dimensionless real None Missing Value CELL CELL percent of Cellulose dimensionless real None Missing Value HEMI HEMI percent of hemicellulose dimensionless real None Missing Value