4.7 Article

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant diversity drive restoration of nitrogen-cycling microbial communities

期刊

MOLECULAR ECOLOGY
卷 30, 期 16, 页码 4133-4146

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/mec.16030

关键词

arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi; degradation; nitrogen-cycling microbial community; plant diversity; restoration

资金

  1. State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology [SKLURE2017-1-7]
  2. Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research Program [2019QZKK0308, 2019QZKK0306]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31870504, 41671254]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that AMF inoculation improved the restoration of soil N-cycling microbial communities, which was related to its role in enhancing interactions within the N-cycling microbial loop. Furthermore, increased plant diversity strengthened the role of AMF in rescuing N-cycling microbial communities.
Soil microbial communities, key players of many crucial ecosystem functions, are susceptible to environmental disturbances, which might cause the loss of microbial diversity and functions. However, few ecological concepts and practices have been developed for rescuing stressed soil microbial communities. Here, we manipulated an experiment with or without arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) inoculation and at three levels (one, three and six species) of plant diversity to disentangle how the AMF and vegetation rescue soil nitrogen (N) -cycling microbial loop from simulated degraded soil ecosystem. Our results showed that AMF inoculation improved the restoration of soil N-cycling microbial communities. This improved restoration was related to the role of AMF in enhancing interactions within the N-cycling microbial loop. Furthermore, increased plant diversity strengthened the role of AMF in rescuing N-cycling microbial communities. Our findings provide novel insights into the roles of AMF and plant diversity in facilitating the rescue of microbial communities in degraded terrestrial ecosystems.

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