4.5 Article

Types of ectomycorrhiza as pollution stress indicators: Case studies in Slovenia

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT
Volume 128, Issue 1-3, Pages 31-45

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-006-9413-4

Keywords

Norway spruce; European beech; fine root growth; mycoindication; mycorrhizal potential; substrate pollution; types of ectomycorrhiza

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mycorrhiza is the main spatial and temporal linkage between different constituents in a forest ecosystem. The functional compatibility and stress tolerance of ectomycorrhizal types is species specific, and therefore the information on the ectomycorrhizal community structure can add to the understanding of processes in forest ecosystems and can also be applied as tools for bioindication of pollution stress in forest soils. We have studied the effects of pollution (N and S) on trees and forest soils by: (1) quantification of ECM types diversity as in situ indicators in forest stands, (2) determination and quantification of pollution-sensitive or -insensitive ECM types as passive monitors, (3) root growth and development of ECM on non-mycorrhizal spruce seedlings, planted at the studied sites (active monitors), and (4) ECM infection (a bioassay based on mycorrhizal inoculum potential) of seedlings in an experimental set-up as ex situ testers. ECM species richness for Norway spruce trees (Picea abies) showed higher values in unpolluted sites than in polluted ones, while the differences were not significant for European beech trees (Fagus sylvatica). As pollution-sensitive or -insensitive ECM species in spruce forests, we suggest Hydnum rufescens (sensitive) and Paxillus involutus (unsensitive). Mycorrhizal potential in Norway spruce seedlings as a bioassay for soil N and S pollution was effective, and is suggested as an additional, standardized and widely comparable system in bioindication of soil pollution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available