4.6 Article

Removal of soil biota alters soil feedback effects on plant growth and defense chemistry

Journal

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
Volume 221, Issue 3, Pages 1478-1491

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.15485

Keywords

fractionation; Jacobaea vulgaris; plant-soil feedback (PSF); pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs); soil biota; spectral reflectance

Categories

Funding

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [31170412, 31470495]
  2. China Exchange Programme (CEP) Joint Research Project [530-5CDP28]
  3. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO VICI) [6595]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined how the removal of soil biota affects plant-soil feedback (PSF) and defense chemistry of Jacobaea vulgaris, an outbreak plant species in Europe containing the defense compounds pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs). Macrofauna and mesofauna, as well as fungi and bacteria, were removed size selectively from unplanted soil or soil planted with J.vulgaris exposed or not to above- or belowground insect herbivores. Wet-sieved fractions, using 1000-, 20-, 5- and 0.2-mu m mesh sizes, were added to sterilized soil and new plants were grown. Sieving treatments were verified by molecular analysis of the inocula. In the feedback phase, plant biomass was lowest in soils with 1000- and 20-mu m inocula, and soils conditioned with plants gave more negative feedback than without plants. Remarkably, part of this negative PSF effect remained present in the 0.2-m inoculum where no bacteria were present. PA concentration and composition of plants with 1000- or 20-mu m inocula differed from those with 5- or 0.2-mu m inocula, but only if soils had been conditioned by undamaged plants or plants damaged by aboveground herbivores. These effects correlated with leaf hyperspectral reflectance. We conclude that size-selective removal of soil biota altered PSFs, but that these PSFs were also influenced by herbivory during the conditioning phase.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available