4.7 Article

Indirect host effect on ectomycorrhizal fungi: Leaf fall and litter quality explain changes in fungal communities on the roots of co-occurring Mediterranean oaks

期刊

SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 42, 期 5, 页码 788-796

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.01.014

关键词

Indirect host effect; Mediterranean forest; Mycorrhiza; Path analysis; Quercus suber (cork oak); Quercus canariensis (Algerian oak); Resupinate fungi; Tree-soil-fungi interactions

资金

  1. FPI-MEC
  2. Spanish MEC [CGL2005-5830-C03-01, CGL2008-4503-C03-01]
  3. European FEDER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Host trees can modify their soil abiotic conditions through their leaf fall quality which in turn may influence the ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungal community composition. We investigated this indirect interaction using a causal modelling approach. We identified ECM fungi on the roots of two coexisting oak species growing in two forests in southern Spain Quercus suber (evergreen) and Quercus canariensis (winter deciduous)-using a PCR-based molecular method. We also analysed the leaf fall, litter and soil sampled beneath the tree canopies to determine the concentrations of key nutrients. The total mycorrhizal pool was comprised of 69 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Tomentella and Russula were the most species-rich, frequent and abundant genera. ECM fungi with epigeous and resupinate fruiting bodies were found in 60% and 34% of the identified mycorrhizas, respectively. The calcium content of litter, which was significantly higher beneath the winter-deciduous oak species due to differences in leaf fall quality, was the most important variable for explaining ECM species distribution. The evaluation of alternative causal models by the d-sep method revealed that only those considering indirect leaf fall-mediated host effects statistically matched the observed covariation patterns between host, environment (litter, topsoil, subsoil) and fungal community variables. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据