4.7 Article

Fungal diversity associated with pulses and its influence on the subsequent wheat crop in the Canadian prairies

期刊

PLANT AND SOIL
卷 414, 期 1-2, 页码 13-31

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-016-3075-y

关键词

Soil fungi; Soil fungal diversity; Pulses; Spring wheat; Pea; Chickpea; Lentil; Monoculture; Crop rotation; Cropping system; Soil microbial legacy; Agriculture; Crop production

资金

  1. Saskatchewan Pulse Growers of the Government of Canada
  2. Growing Forward Program of the Government of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and aims Variations in root-associated fungal communities contribute to the so-called 'crop rotation benefit' on soil productivity. We assessed the effects of chickpea, lentil, and pea in wheat-based rotations, as compared to wheat monoculture, on the structure of root-associated fungal communities, and described the legacy of pulses on a following wheat crop. Methods The internal transcribed spacer (ITS) and 18S rRNA gene markers, and 454 amplicon pyrosequencing were used to describe the fungal communities of crop roots and rhizosphere soil in a field experiment and agronomic data were collected. Results Pulses influenced only the structure of the non-mycorrhizal fungal community of roots. Fusarium tricinctum, Clonostachys rosea, Fusarium redolens, and Cryptococcus sp. were specific to certain crops. Despite the absence of selective effects of pulses on their associated arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungal community, pea had a legacy effect on the structure of the AM fungal community associated with the roots of the following wheat crop, in one of the two year/sites examined. Species of Mortierella, Cryptococcus, and Paraglomus in wheat rhizosphere soil may benefit yield, whereas species of Fusarium, Davidiella, Lachnum, Sistotrema and Podospora may reduce yield. Conclusion The effect of pulse crops on root fungal communities varied with rotation crop species. Pulses had various effects on the physiology of the following wheat crop, including increased productivity.

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