4.7 Article

Fungal and bacterial responses to phenolic compounds and amino acids in high altitude barren soils

Journal

SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 34, Issue 7, Pages 989-995

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00032-9

Keywords

substrate-induced growth response; substrate-induced respiration; inhibition; extreme environment; Talus soil; fungi; bacteria; phenolics; amino acids

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The total, fungal and bacterial biomass of functional groups capable of growth on specific phenolic compounds and amino acids was determined for a high altitude (3750 m) unvegetated talus soil from the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Soils were incubated with C-14-labeled carbon substrates (salicylate, phenol, glutamate, or alanine) and either fungal inhibitors (cyclohexamide plus nystatin), bacterial inhibitors (ampicillin plus streptomycin), all four inhibitors or no inhibitors. The assays were carried out at 22 degreesC for soil collected in August 1998, and 10 degreesC for soils collected in July 1999 under snow, to determine if trends were consistent seasonally. Two important trends emerged. First, fungi and bacteria grew on different phenolic compounds. Growth on salicylate was entirely fungal, whereas growth on phenol was entirely bacterial. However growth on amino acids was by both bacteria and fungi. Second, the fungi appear to dominate labile C mineralization in spring, and bacteria dominate in summer. Glutamate-mineralizing fungi had a higher biomass than glutamate-mineralizing bacteria (600 vs. 200 ng C g(-1)) in spring, but lower biomass than bacteria in summer (2 vs. 26 mug C g(-1)). Salicylate-mineralizing fungi had higher biomass in spring than in summer (100 vs. 50 ng C g(-1)). These results suggest that fungi and bacteria are partitioning labile-C mineralization both by substrate (in the case of phenolic compounds) and seasonally. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. 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