Variable responses of carbon and nitrogen contents in vegetation and soil to herbivory and warming in high‐Arctic tundra

Chemical responses of tundra vegetation and tundra soil to environmental changes are likely to differ, with implications for ecosystem functioning, yet they are rarely compared. Here, we aimed at comparing sensitivity and magnitude of short‐term carbon and nitrogen responses of three main tundra ecosystem compartments: vascular plants, mosses, and soil, to two environmental perturbations: herbivore disturbance and warming. In a full‐factorial field experiment in the high‐Arctic Svalbard, we simulated herbivore disturbance as spring grubbing activity by pink‐footed geese (Anser brachyrhynchus) and passively increased summer temperatures using open‐top chambers. Manipulations were set up within three habitats that differ in soil moisture and carried out for two consecutive growing seasons. Overall, we found small and few significant responses to herbivore disturbance and warming, suggesting that carbon and nitrogen contents of high‐Arctic ecosystems are relatively resistant to these perturbations, at least in the short term. However, the three ecosystem compartments still differed in their sensitivity to perturbations (vascular plants > soil > mosses), and this was exacerbated by their differential sensitivity across habitats (mesic > moist > wet). Also, while vascular plants responded to herbivore disturbance in mesic and wet habitats and to warming in mesic and moist habitats, soil and mosses only responded to herbivore disturbance in mesic and wet habitats, respectively. Responses to treatments were generally consistent across the two growing seasons, despite great differences in temperature conditions and large between‐year variations in the chemical composition of the three ecosystem compartments. These findings highlight the potential for environmental perturbations to have small, yet differential short‐term impacts on the carbon and nitrogen contents of vascular plants, mosses, and soil, both within and between tundra habitats. Our results imply that assessments of a single ecosystem compartment in a given context cannot be extrapolated to the whole ecosystem, thus stressing the importance of considering both vegetation and soil carbon and nitrogen responses, and how they display across habitats, in order to better understand how environmental changes might affect biogeochemical processes in the tundra. Longer‐term studies should dig deeper into the relative role of (simulated) global change drivers vs. natural inter‐annual climatic fluctuations for tundra ecosystem carbon and nitrogen dynamics.