4.7 Article

Repeated annual glyphosate applications may impair beneficial soil microorganisms in temperate grassland

Journal

AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT
Volume 230, Issue -, Pages 184-190

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2016.06.011

Keywords

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi; Dark septate endophytes; Free-living diazotrophs; Non-target organisms

Funding

  1. CONICET [BID-PICT 01525, BID-PICT 00463]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to the worldwide use of the herbicide glyphosate, there is a growing interest in understanding its impact on beneficial soilmicroorganisms. However, most studies have been focused on evaluating the effects on these microorganisms of a single application in agricultural crops, despite the fact that repeated applications is a common scenario in different production systems. We evaluated the impact of four annual glyphosate applications on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), dark septate endophytes (DSE) and free-living diazotrophs in a temperate grassland. Sub-lethal (0.8lha(-1)) and recommended field doses (3lha(-1)) were analyzed. AMF viable spores and free-living diazotrophs densities were reduced by 56% and 82% respectively, after the fourth application even at sublethal dose. While total AMF root colonization in Lolium arundinaceum was not affected among treatments, arbuscules percentage was reduced in plants grown in plots treated with 3lha(-1). A similar response was detected in DSE root colonization. Considering the role they have in structuring plant communities, these deleterious effects on beneficial soil microorganisms might negatively impact on grassland productivity and diversity. It is necessary to investigate the resilience of the microbial community in order to develop a long-term strategic management of glyphosate applications that would achieve the desired objectives without irreversibly affecting soil biota. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available