Table 3. The mean and range of root and leaf N, P and N∶P ratio in this study and others.
Data source | N (mg g−1) | P (mg g−1) | N∶P | References | |||
Mean | Range | Mean | Range | Mean | Range | ||
Root | |||||||
Northern Tibet | 13.05 | 6.30–27.42 | 0.60 | 0.23–1.25 | 23.40 | 8.80–47.55 | This study |
Inner Mongolia Grassland | 10.90 | — | 0.7 | — | 15.57 | — | (Zhou et al. 2010) |
Global study | 9.8 | — | 0.78 | — | 16.0 | — | (Yan et al. 2011) |
Leaf | |||||||
Northern Tibet | 23.20 | 11.39–50.13 | 1.38 | 0.58–2.93 | 17.87 | 7.28–33.09 | This study |
Chinese grassland | 27.6 | — | 1.9 | — | 15.3 | — | (He et al. 2008) |
Chinese flora | 20.24*** | 6.25–52.61 | 1.45NS | 0.05–10.27 | 16.35NS | 3.28–78.89 | (Han et al. 2005) |
Global flora | 20.1*** | 4.1–59.9 | 1.77*** | 0.1–6.99 | 13.8*** | 2.6–111.8 | (Reich and Oleksyn 2004) |
*** Significant differences in leaf N and P concentrations and the N∶P ratio between the northern Tibetan Plateau and other areas at P<0.001, NS represents no significant difference in the leaf P content and the N∶P ratio between the northern Tibetan Plateau and other areas (P>0.05).