4.7 Article

Carbon allocation to ectomycorrhizal fungi correlates with belowground allocation in culture studies

Journal

ECOLOGY
Volume 87, Issue 3, Pages 563-569

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1890/05-0755

Keywords

belowground NPP; carbon flux; culture vs. field studies; ecromycorrhizae; forest ecosystems; fungal C allocation; net primary production; nutrient limitation; Pinus spp.; root C allocation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ectomycorrhizal fungi form symbioses with most temperate and boreal tree species, but difficulties in measuring carbon allocation to these symbionts have prevented the assessment of their importance in forest ecosystems. Here, I Surveyed allocation patterns in 14 culture studies and five field studies of ectomycorrhizal plants. In Culture Studies, allocation to ectomycorrhizal fungi (NPPf) was linearly related to total below-round net primary production (NPPb) by the equation NPPf = 41.5% x NPPb - 11.3% (r(2) = 0.55, P < 0.001) and ranged from 1% to 2 1% of total net primary production. As a percentage of NPP, allocation to ectomycorrhizal fungi was highest at. lowest plant growth rates and lowest nutrient availabilities. Because total below ground allocation can be estimated using carbon balance techniques, these relationships should allow ecologists to incorporate mycorrhizal fungi into existing ecosystem models. In field Studies, allocation to ectomycorrhizal fungi ranged from 0% to 22% of total allocation, but wide differences in measurement techniques made intercomparisons difficult. Techniques such as fungal in-growth cores, root branching-order studies, and isotopic analyses Could refine Our estimates of turnover rates of fine roots, mycorrhizae, and extraradical hyphae. Together with ecosystem modeling, such techniques could soon provide good estimates of the relative importance of root vs. fungal allocation in belowground carbon budgets.

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