4.6 Article

Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization of semi-aquatic grasses along a wide hydrologic gradient

Journal

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
Volume 145, Issue 1, Pages 145-155

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00566.x

Keywords

arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi; flooding; gradient; inoculum potential; Leersia hexandra; Panicum hemitomon; wetlands

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effect of soil flooding on arbuscular-mycorrhizal (AM) fungal colonization of wetland plants was investigated using Panicum hemitomon and Leersia hexandra, two semi-aquatic grasses (Graminaceae) that grow along a wide hydrologic gradient in Carolina bay wetlands of the southeastern US coastal plain. Three related investigations were conducted along the dry-to-wet gradient in these wetlands; a field survey of AM fungal root colonization in eight wetlands, monthly monitoring of colonization patterns in P. hemitomon over a growing season, and an inoculum potential bioassay of soils collected along the gradient. The field survey showed that AM fungal colonization was strongly negatively correlated with water depth, but colonization was present in most root samples. The monthly assessment indicated that AM fungal colonization was lowest in plots that were consistently wet but rose as some plots underwent seasonal drying. The inoculum potential assay of dry, intermediate, and wet soils performed under both dry and saturated conditions showed that soils that were wet for >1 yr had the same ability to form mycorrhizas in bait plants as those that had remained dry. These findings suggested that the lower degree of colonization in wet areas observed in the field survey was because of the presence of surface water rather than low numbers of mycorrhizal propagules in the soil. Overall, the results of these investigations show that flooding is partially but not totally inhibitory to AM fungal colonization of wetland grasses.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available