4.7 Article

Native maize landraces from Los Tuxtlas, Mexico show varying mycorrhizal dependency for P uptake

Journal

BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS
Volume 50, Issue 2, Pages 405-414

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00374-013-0847-x

Keywords

Arbuscular mycorrhizae; Phosphorus availability; Traditional polyculture management; Zea mays; milpas

Categories

Funding

  1. BioPop project (CONACYT-Veracruz) [FOMIX 94427]
  2. ECOS-ANUIES [M08A01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Different degrees of dependency on the activity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) exist between native maize landraces and hybrids. In Los Tuxtlas, Mexico, the Popoluca people maintain a traditional polycultural land management with more than 15 native landraces of maize; however, it is not known whether the recent substitution of local maize for improved hybrids and fertilization has affected the integrity of the mycorrhizal symbiosis in these naturally phosphorus-poor systems. A greenhouse experiment was conducted to evaluate the response of four Popoluca maize landraces and the hybrid Texcoco to the presence of native AMF in conditions of low and medium P input (5 and 65 mg kg(-1), respectively). After 120 days in both P treatments, the native landraces Black and Yellow presented higher colonization and had acquired more P in their shoot biomass than the hybrid. The moderate fertilization did not appear to have affected the integrity of the mycorrhizal symbiosis, since all of the maize types presented a positive mycorrhizal dependency (2-14 %). Under low P conditions, the Texcoco hybrid maize presented one of the highest mycorrhizal dependencies; however, unlike the local landraces, this was not reflected in a higher tissue P concentration. The results obtained indicate that the native maize Black was the best at capturing symbiotic and direct P, which makes this landrace an important genetic and cultural heritage for the Popoluca and for the world.

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