4.7 Article

Exposure to the leaf litter microbiome of healthy adults protects seedlings from pathogen damage

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0641

关键词

community assembly; foliar endophytic fungi; Janzen-Connell hypothesis; Theobroma cacao; vertical stratification

资金

  1. NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
  2. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute Short Term Fellowship
  3. Mycological Society of America
  4. Garden Club of America
  5. Indiana University
  6. Simons Foundation (WTW) [429440]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is increasingly recognized that microbiota affect host health and physiology. However, it is unclear what factors shape microbiome community assembly in nature, and how microbiome assembly can be manipulated to improve host health. All plant leaves host foliar endophytic fungi, which make up a diverse, environmentally acquired fungal microbiota. Here, we experimentally manipulated assembly of the cacao tree (Theobroma cacao) fungal microbiome in nature and tested the effect of assembly outcome on host health. Using next-generation sequencing, as well as culture- based methods coupled with Sanger sequencing, we found that manipulating leaf litter exposure and location within the forest canopy significantly altered microbiome composition in cacao. Exposing cacao seedlings to leaf litter from healthy conspecific adults enriched the seedling microbiome with Colletotrichum tropicale, a fungal endophyte known to enhance pathogen resistance of cacao seedlings by upregulating host defensive pathways. As a result, seedlings exposed to healthy conspecific litter experienced reduced pathogen damage. Our results link processes that affect the assembly and composition of microbiome communities to their functional consequences for host success, and have broad implications for understanding plant-microbe interactions. Deliberate manipulation of the plant-fungal microbiome also has potentially important applications for cacao production and other agricultural systems in general.

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